I had a Tamron super zoom in the past and found it very good. I now have the Nikon 28 - 400 z mount and find it equally as good. The "pros" don't like them as they think everyone should use prime lenses. I don't have any such hangups.
When I'm out hiking, 28-300 would give me everything I need in one lens. Currently I use a 24-105 backed up with a 70-300. This would save weight and changing in the wild - win, win!
So for plebs non pros like me, whats a decent lens that hits 400mm and keeps the f stop low if thats the causes the background blur? I have a Tamron 28-200 2.8-5.6 now. Pretty damn good lens, but sometimes, I just want a little more zoom, tinge more light, more focal blur. Also in the market for a macro to take some really close photos. Have an A7rV. Often shoot lots of night skies, so auto just doesnt seem to get stars crisp. Have to manual focus.
Context is king. He had just mentioned the α1 before the α7 IV. The real problem was that he kept referring to that kid's bicycle / bike, which was obviously a tricycle. If he can't even count to three, then ok, don't listen to what he says about the α7 IV.
I have the Tamron 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 for my Fuji X-S20. Great travel lens and fairly decent for occasional wildlife. Can’t really complain about the IQ at all. Just wish the lens OIS worked better with Fuji IBIS and that Fuji’s AF worked better. Tamron kills it in this segment
No. We grabbed the wrong lens for the thumbnail and it’s actually a 50-300 lens. So I didn’t want to miss lead anyone as we already sent the lens back and can’t re make a thumbnail. Why must everything be a conspiracy instead of asking
Excellent review. I bought the original 28-300 back in 2006 and it got me a lot of great pictures. I believe you used the term higher apertures twice but with opposite meanings
Let's be honest this lens plus topaz ai will be more than enough for 95% of users. When i look at many images online...I think it would be good enough too.😊
because we grabbed the wrong lens when we took the thumbnail. I am technically holding the 50-300 lens by accident and we already sent back the 28-300. So I had to improvise.
![โรงเรียนห้ามรัก โดนจับได้ตาย...!! [เอิร์นไดเม่]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4u02Sbr556Q/mqdefault.jpg)
I had a Tamron super zoom in the past and found it very good. I now have the
Nikon 28 - 400 z mount and find it equally as good. The "pros" don't like them
as they think everyone should use prime lenses. I don't have any such hangups.
personally I love this type of lens
once you understand how these work they're alot of fun
When I'm out hiking, 28-300 would give me everything I need in one lens. Currently I use a 24-105 backed up with a 70-300. This would save weight and changing in the wild - win, win!
I LOVE my Nikon 28-300 f/3,5-5,6. Very underrated imo.
So for plebs non pros like me, whats a decent lens that hits 400mm and keeps the f stop low if thats the causes the background blur? I have a Tamron 28-200 2.8-5.6 now. Pretty damn good lens, but sometimes, I just want a little more zoom, tinge more light, more focal blur. Also in the market for a macro to take some really close photos. Have an A7rV. Often shoot lots of night skies, so auto just doesnt seem to get stars crisp. Have to manual focus.
was just looking at the older Tamron 28-300 EF for my own "one lens to rule them all"
reminds me of my first non-kit lens the Sigma 18-250
Wish there's a lightweight 100-400 Tamron. That's the only RF lens after moving on
At 1:55. Yikes my guy, saying the a7iv is more “affordable, lower-end style camera.” Really out of touch comment
Is it? Or is it relative speaking? Everything’s relative.
It's only lower end compared to the A1
Context is king. He had just mentioned the α1 before the α7 IV. The real problem was that he kept referring to that kid's bicycle / bike, which was obviously a tricycle. If he can't even count to three, then ok, don't listen to what he says about the α7 IV.
This would be a great addition if it could be linked to the Canon Rf 28-300 which would be 45- 480 equivalent cover my needs when out walking.
I have the Tamron 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 for my Fuji X-S20. Great travel lens and fairly decent for occasional wildlife. Can’t really complain about the IQ at all. Just wish the lens OIS worked better with Fuji IBIS and that Fuji’s AF worked better. Tamron kills it in this segment
do you ever have a negative conclusion about a product that is sent to you?
You seriously blurred out the aperture markings from the thumbnail?? SERIOUSLY??
No. We grabbed the wrong lens for the thumbnail and it’s actually a 50-300 lens. So I didn’t want to miss lead anyone as we already sent the lens back and can’t re make a thumbnail. Why must everything be a conspiracy instead of asking
Interesting, I was about to purchase the Nikon 28-400mm
I don't even have a Mirrorless Camera yet, the Z6ii is on sale.
Hmm, good carry around lens like the Nikon Z 28-400
Excellent review. I bought the original 28-300 back in 2006 and it got me a lot of great pictures. I believe you used the term higher apertures twice but with opposite meanings
As someone with chronic lower back issues, I can’t watch field hockey without cringing.
Let's be honest this lens plus topaz ai will be more than enough for 95% of users. When i look at many images online...I think it would be good enough too.😊
Screw topaz
don't listen Jared, if you aint earning like 100k on photography, then respect your money and buy that filter.
Don’t buy that filter. I made zero dollars and still didn’t use a filter.
Why blur the aperture on the thumbnail?
because we grabbed the wrong lens when we took the thumbnail. I am technically holding the 50-300 lens by accident and we already sent back the 28-300. So I had to improvise.
@@froknowsphoto got to make due! Thanks for the answer!
Second
I will never shoot raw but I agree!😉
Canon color science 😌.
CAN⭕N EF28-300/3.5-5.6 is 🙌✌️💪
First