I think anyone who has expected more from the 28-300 VR should
just do a quick compare to the EF 28-300L. If you compare measurements
and findings of the two lenses and if you compare the mechanical and optical
effort that was made in the Canon-L you know why it is the better (and
far more expensive) lens of the two. (The 28-300L is still far from being
really good at any specific focal length ... but it is good at being a superzoom).
So, the Nikkor is what it is, an OEM superzoom for a very affordable price, and
with moderate weight, but including the compromises needed to make such
a lens. Yes, it will certainly make some users happy and will disappoint others.
A comparison to the Tamron 28-300 VC will be interesting. Optically, the Tamron
is likely not far from the Nikkor, but I doubt that buildquality is comparable.
Just my 2cts ... Rainer
just do a quick compare to the EF 28-300L. If you compare measurements
and findings of the two lenses and if you compare the mechanical and optical
effort that was made in the Canon-L you know why it is the better (and
far more expensive) lens of the two. (The 28-300L is still far from being
really good at any specific focal length ... but it is good at being a superzoom).
So, the Nikkor is what it is, an OEM superzoom for a very affordable price, and
with moderate weight, but including the compromises needed to make such
a lens. Yes, it will certainly make some users happy and will disappoint others.
A comparison to the Tamron 28-300 VC will be interesting. Optically, the Tamron
is likely not far from the Nikkor, but I doubt that buildquality is comparable.
Just my 2cts ... Rainer