Good deal? I *think* so...

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

AKscubadiver

Registered
Messages
14
Reaction score
1
Location
Alaska
# of dives
25 - 49
Found the d7000 at Costco after I almost picked one up at a local shop. The 18-200mm lens retails for $600-$800 alone. It's only $200 above the kit price elsewhere with the mediocre 18-105mm lens.

I tried posting the link, but had problems. You can search Costco.com for D7000 and look if you like :)

Thoughts?
 
Personally, I don't like the 18-200. Optically, it's mediocre just like the 18-105, it's just mediocre over a larger range of focal lengths and costs a lot more. In general, the point of an SLR camera is that you can change lenses, and don't need to rely on the compromises of a single lens for every situation.

My lens bag for my Nikon D90 is generally:

Tokina 11-16
Nikkor 35mm
Nikkor 55-200

Although a Nikkor 60mm and an SB-600 speedlight often end up in there, typically replacing the 55-200. I use the 55-200 the least of all my lenses, but I tend to carry it around a lot. There are also many better telephoto lenses than the 55-200, but because I take so few telephoto shots I haven;t bought any of them.
 
Still, a good deal. I bought it yesterday! Yay..and the wifey wasn't even pissed. It cost as much as my first car almost...lol.

Having fun so far, gotta get back into photography mode while I work towards u/w equipment.
 
You'll like the 18-200. It's not the greatest lens at either end, but takes decent pictures through the whole range, focuses quite quickly and the VR helps a lot for hand held pictures at 200. I use mine more than any other lens, because you can just leave it on there. If I had to start over, I'd have invested in the 80-400VR and had a second zoom like the Sigma 17-70 macro or similar to take portraits and close shots. When I'm not diving, the 18-200 stays on the camera all the time.
 
Not a fan of the 18-200.

Not wide enough when I want a real wide angle.
Not fast enough/enough reach for most things I'd shoot with a telephoto.
Too slow for the sort of shots I want to do at normal lengths.

Mediocre optical quality overall.

That said, I understand why many people like it.. though if you're in this camp you might be better off with a D3100 or D5100.
 
Yah, seeing that it appears to be a better kit lens than the 18-105, i'm glad to have it. I just picked a 35mm 1.8 and am liking that also. Soon, i'll work on some u/w type lenses. I like playing with my sea life, but it's not the best for above water. It does a great job for a point and shoot though.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/teric/

Back
Top Bottom