Geoff_M
DIS Veteran, DVC Member, "Cum Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2000
- Messages
- 11,979
Quite frankly, I've found that just using my 18-70mm at WDW worked for me just fine. As for the 28-300, here are a couple of thoughts. "All-in-one" lenses tend to come with a lot of compromises. For starters the f6.3 @ 300mm is a downer... most AF modules will start to have "issues" past f5.6, unless the scene is well lit. "All-in-one" lenses can also suffer from other quality issues such as softness, distortion, chromatic aberation, etc. This isn't to say that such lenses are "junk", just be aware that if it were possible to make a quality lenses in that price range, Nikon and Canon would be making them too. Canon does have a 28-300 f5.6 in their line-up... and it's $2,200 here. If you go with an "all-in-one" make sure you do a lot of research on it before jumping. Cameras are "weakest link" systems... slap a sub-par lens on the best camera body in the world and you'll get sub-par images.
In addition to the possible performance issues, I don't think that 28mm would be wide enough to make you happy at WDW. On a D50 that the equal to a 42mm lens on a 35mm film camera. Effectively, thats not even into the wide angle range. So you're probably going to need two lenses anyway. I'd add a decent 80-200 to your arsenal and I think you'd be a lot happier with the results.
In addition to the possible performance issues, I don't think that 28mm would be wide enough to make you happy at WDW. On a D50 that the equal to a 42mm lens on a 35mm film camera. Effectively, thats not even into the wide angle range. So you're probably going to need two lenses anyway. I'd add a decent 80-200 to your arsenal and I think you'd be a lot happier with the results.
