Register · Search · Software · Join Upload & Sell · Hosting

	Moderated by: Fred Miranda
	Username   Password FM Forum Rules Nikon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews FM Forums | Nikon-mount SLRs | Join Upload & Sell    Search Used end    Archive 2007 · Considering Nikon

TimothyR Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #1 · Considering Nikon lil krause wrote: TimothyR wrote: I’m taking a first look at Nikon as an option since I got a $300 estimate back from Canon repair. I think I’d be better served by putting that money toward a new body rather than fixing what I have. Since I don’t have a lot tied up in lenses, I could make the jump if I felt Nikon could serve me well. Before you go sour on the repair quote you should go and see how much the camera is selling for used. I did that with one of my D1x's (repair costing 396.00 usd) but after looking at the used market, used ones are selling for $900.00. After the fix it should be like a brand new camera so it was worth it to me to get it fixed. Even if I sell it for 800.00 I would be making 100% on my money. tom Hopefully I did not make a forum faux pas by starting a new thread this way. Please correct me if I did. Tom, I've done some searching. The camera is a 10D. I don't have access to completed auctions on ebay, but at KEH and Amazon they are $5xx - 6xx. So, for $300 repair I think I'll put the money toward a new body. I bought the 10D and two lower end lenses as a bundle. So, like I said, I don't have a lot tied up in expensive lenses. My first DSLR was a Canon D30. Other than the slow AF, I liked the pictures. I bought the 10D to "upgrade" and gave the D30 to my mother as a present. I'm considering Nikon because I'm not a gearhead. I'm looking for a good, solid, reliable camera that I can use for a long time. The spec's on the Canon 40D are very impressive for the price, but I don' t feel like waiting for six months of field testing to see if it has any issues. Aug 22, 2007 at 03:03 PM

dinoadventures Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #2 · Considering Nikon I sold my 10D for about $410 on here, I believe. I have since switched to Nikon. I decided between the D200 and D2H and chose the latter. I am very happy with it! It was a little tricky finding one that hasn't been used by sports or press photographers, though. I have a feeling that if you're coming from a 10D like I did you'll be very happy with the D200. Aug 22, 2007 at 03:16 PM

Avi B Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: On p.1 #3 · Considering Nikon So Tim, what would you say would be your price range for a new body/lenses? I honestly think that even the D40 with its kit lens produces excellent pictures and is really easy to use (think P&S easy to use). If you feel that the D40 is too much of a "toy", then I'd look around for a D70s with the 18-70mm lens. Although the D70s is older, it's a good body IMHO, even at "only" 6MP. If you have a higher budget, I would say to go with the best bang-for-buck camera anywhere, which is the D200. With it, you should get a 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G lens. That lens is quite nice, especially at the f/8-f/11 range, where it gives the pro 17-55 f/2.8 a run for its money. So that is a good starting point. Of course, lens selection after the basic kit there is based on what you want to photograph. However, the D200 is definitely the body that gives you great value, with good AF, good ergs, fantastic IQ, weather-sealing and metal body (covered with plastic). It is destined to be a classic, if it isn't already. And at 10MP, it has the "legs" to go for a long while. Aug 22, 2007 at 03:19 PM

TimothyR Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #4 · Considering Nikon Thanks for the input. I’m looking at the D200. After a little sticker shock, I think I can swing one of the bundles with a lens. I see that some of the bundles also come with an 18-135 and I saw one with an 18-200 lens. I’d love to do the 18-200 but that bundle stings a bit. Any opinions on the bigger lenses? Most of what I shoot are landscapes, wildlife and what I call standard stuff; no portraits and I’d love to do sports but my other camera couldn't handle it. Aug 22, 2007 at 03:51 PM

Avi B Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: On p.1 #5 · Considering Nikon I would still say to go for the 18-70 as a starting lens. I used to have one, and it was quite a good performer. The 18-135 is supposed to be sharper, but suffer from CA. The 18-70 doesn't have any problems, except for some distortion at the wide-end, which is true of all the 18-xxx range lenses. Also it's good for all-round shooting, you can even do studio portraits with it at the long end! Everyone seems to be ga-ga over the 18-200, but I've never used it. However, seems like a decent solution for one-lens shooting. There are lenses which will get you much better image quality in that range though, so it depends on your needs again. What kind of sports do you want to shoot? As say for basketball, you'd prefer a 85mm f/1.8 lens over a 70-200 f/2.8 lens (this could be Sigma HSM, or an older Nikkor AFS 80-200mm f/2.8). But to start off with, go with the 18-70 Aug 22, 2007 at 04:14 PM

tkearney Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #6 · Considering Nikon If you want to do sports, I would seriously consider the 18-200 combo. I haven't used that lens, but from shooting sports with my 70-200, I would say that 200mm is probably the minimum you would need to isolate the action. From what others have said about the 18-200, it should do all that you want to do and serve you very well. It seems to be just an excellent all purpose lens that pairs quite nicely with the D200. Good luck with your decision. Aug 22, 2007 at 04:19 PM

dinoadventures Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #7 · Considering Nikon tkearney wrote: If you want to do sports, I would seriously consider the 18-200 combo. I haven't used that lens, but from shooting sports with my 70-200, I would say that 200mm is probably the minimum you would need to isolate the action. From what others have said about the 18-200, it should do all that you want to do and serve you very well. It seems to be just an excellent all purpose lens that pairs quite nicely with the D200. Good luck with your decision. An 18-200 for sports? I would say that's not going to work out well at all in anything but broad daylight. Indoors, thats a recipe for failure. The AF-D 80-200 2.8 is a far better choice. For about the price of the 18-200, you can pick up the 18-70 and 80-200 secondhand. There's no question which option will serve you better. Aug 22, 2007 at 04:26 PM

Andre Labonte Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #8 · Considering Nikon Avi B wrote: I would still say to go for the 18-70 as a starting lens. I used to have one, and it was quite a good performer. The 18-135 is supposed to be sharper, but suffer from CA. The 18-70 doesn't have any problems, except for some distortion at the wide-end, which is true of all the 18-xxx range lenses. Also it's good for all-round shooting, you can even do studio portraits with it at the long end! Everyone seems to be ga-ga over the 18-200, but I've never used it. However, seems like a decent solution for one-lens shooting. There are lenses which will get you much better image quality in that range though, so it depends on your needs again. What kind of sports do you want to shoot? As say for basketball, you'd prefer a 85mm f/1.8 lens over a 70-200 f/2.8 lens (this could be Sigma HSM, or an older Nikkor AFS 80-200mm f/2.8). But to start off with, go with the 18-70 I'm with Avi on this one: If I had to buy today, I would get the D200 for sure. Be sure to ask about the $100.00 rebate promotion. As for lenses, I have used the 18-200 and was quite impressed with it as a one-lens solution for the average person. I like my 70-200VR better and need the f/2.8, so for me the 18-200 is not an option. I do evening (as the sun goes down) little league and fine that f/4 or slower just does not cut it. I do have the 18-70 and am very happy with it. I would like f/2.8 but since since I have the 50 f/1.8 the f/4.5 at the long end of the 18-70 does not hinder me too much. I've NOT heard great things about the 18-135 in the area of distortion @ the wide end nor about CA ... I have yet to try one though. Best of luck to you. Andre Aug 22, 2007 at 04:30 PM

HeaVy Offline Upload & Sell: On p.1 #9 · Considering Nikon You might also look at the 70-300mm VR lens. Mine is quick to focus it has VR so it is hand holdable and it is sharp sharp sharp. It's a lot of lens for less than $500. It would make a nice light outdoor sports lens. If you do use need something a little wider I would look at the 18-70mm. I use the 18-70mm and the 70-300mm. They cover a lot of range for a fairly low price. If you want to save a little money you might also look at the 55-200mm VR. I've not used it but I've heard it is a very nice lens and it is less than $275 new. Aug 22, 2007 at 04:47 PM

allen_a_george Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #10 · Considering Nikon I guess the 18-55 & 55 - 200 VR and the 18-70 & 70 - 300 VR are designed to be used as a combo. The first set uses 52mm filters, the second 67mm filters. Avi, I'm curious about your suggestion to use an 18-70 for wildlife - wouldn't that be too short for reach? I'm not interested in wildlife, but I'd assumed most wildlife photographers loved longer and longer glass :confused: Aug 22, 2007 at 04:58 PM

Avi B Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: On p.1 #11 · Considering Nikon No, my suggestion was not to use 18-70 for wildlife, infact I didn't mention anything about that. The 18-70 is a great performer in its range, considering its price. That range isn't exactly what you'd call "wildlife" range (in 35mm FOV, it's 27-105mm). The wildlife range more along 400mm+ but since I don't shoot wildlife (except in zoos - does that still qualify as wildlife), I can't really say. Depending on sport, you want certain ranges, say B-ball, 85mm is okay... Some field sports, 70-200 is okay, others, you want out to 300mm... So it all depends. Edited by Avi B on Aug 22, 2007 at 01:33 PM GMT Aug 22, 2007 at 05:37 PM

bestfromnw Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #12 · Considering Nikon get d200, i just switched form 30D because i neded something weather proof and with better metering system Aug 22, 2007 at 06:09 PM

TimothyR Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #13 · Considering Nikon Thanks for all the suggestions. As far as sports, I don't have anything planned but am kind of excited at the prospect of being able to shoot them. A long time ago I tried amateur hockey, but the D30 couldn't handle it. Bestfromnw, you mention weatherproof. I was shocked to read the article what was linked from here about the Canons failing during the shoot in a light rain. Never thought of that. Hopefully this weekend I'll visit a couple of camera stores and at least get my hands on one. Not to start a "best place to purchase" thread, but anybody have a very reputable place with good prices they like? I've read the reviews on KEH, B&H, Adorama, etc. Aug 22, 2007 at 07:28 PM

Avi B Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: On p.1 #14 · Considering Nikon Some time ago, there was something about Adorama using bait'n'switch tactics.... Aug 22, 2007 at 07:31 PM

Andre Labonte Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #15 · Considering Nikon I use B&H or Hunts and that's it. Aug 22, 2007 at 09:58 PM

turnert Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #16 · Considering Nikon TimothyR wrote: Not to start a "best place to purchase" thread, but anybody have a very reputable place with good prices they like? I've read the reviews on KEH, B&H, Adorama, etc. B&H, Cameta, Calumet, Roberts Imaging, Adorama (you do have to be careful about their call backs to sell you a filter for the lens you just rush ordered, but they do have a great rental dept.!), Pro Photo Supply (Portland, OR), Glazers (Seattle), and others as mentioned (e.g., Hunts). Other NYC Photo District places like 17th St. Photo are also generally reliable. Always check www.resellerratings.com prior to trying someplace new that isn't mentioned here. Ted Aug 22, 2007 at 10:06 PM

TimothyR Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #17 · Considering Nikon Oh, man. The new releases just made my decisions harder (in a very good way). Regardless, I guess my next move is to just wait. Wait longer and scrape some more money together for the D300 or wait longer and see how much the D200's price will drop (knowing full well that if I choose to go the D200 route that I won't be able to find one new). Aug 23, 2007 at 01:13 PM

allen_a_george Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #18 · Considering Nikon TimothyR wrote: ...knowing full well that if I choose to go the D200 route that I won't be able to find one new... Not true Timothy. The D200 remains in the lineup, though I wouldn't be surprised to see a mild refresh that incorporated some of the D300's ergonomic changes (remolded grip, new & higher button placement). And don't forget, it may be a buyer's market for used D200s over the next 3 months as people sell and upgrade. Aug 23, 2007 at 01:29 PM

TimothyR Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #19 · Considering Nikon allen_a_george wrote: And don't forget, it may be a buyer's market for used D200s over the next 3 months as people sell and upgrade. True, my issue is that I've never had much luck in buying used. A perfect example of that is the 10D in this thread. Part of it is bad luck and part of it, admittedly, is me not thinking. I don't have a contact that I feel comfortable with for used stuff and I don't feel that I have enough experience to make sure I'm not getting screwed. Aug 23, 2007 at 01:53 PM

Avi B Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: On p.1 #20 · Considering Nikon Well, the price of the D200 should be coming down, and it is still a great value, mostly because it's actually here. Announcements don't actually help you take pictures, cameras do But announcements like this make you feel good! Aug 23, 2007 at 01:58 PM

	FM Forums | Nikon-mount SLRs | Join Upload & Sell end

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password   Lost your password?