Skip Navigation

Well lve gone and done it after much debate!!!

Travel Forums Travel Photography Well lve gone and done it after much debate!!!

Page

Last Post

11. Posted by Purdy (Travel Guru 3546 posts) 10y

Quoting Q_

PM me if you're serious. This is the more expensive ED version.

It sounds as if its too professional for me Q! Im still learning to use the camera so l think l might just wait on the lense! TP turning into EBAY!

12. Posted by Sander (Moderator 4834 posts) 10y

Quoting Q_

This is the more expensive ED version.

Heh. Thinking about replacing it with the new 70-300 VR?

  • has the cheapy G, and is actually considering selling it as well, but not before having bought a replacement lens, which won't be anywhere near on time for Purdy*
13. Posted by Q' (Travel Guru 1987 posts) 10y

Quoting Sander

Heh. Thinking about replacing it with the new 70-300 VR?

Not quite. Getting rid of it before it gets replaced by the VR version. 300mm doesn't seem all that useful it turns out. I'm looking at the 80-400mm nikon or the 50-500mm sigma. your 200mm VR is probably a whole lot more useful than the 300mm. what were you thinking of replacing it with?

14. Posted by Sander (Moderator 4834 posts) 10y

I don't have the 18-200 VR yet, so with that. :) (I've used it, but that was borrowed from my brother.)

And I really want to buy the 18-200 at the same time as the 12-24, as the 18mm on the VR has decidedly less quality than the 18mm on my 18-70, and I'd feel kinda useless walking around with the 18-200 plus 18-70. But the 12-24 is insanely expensive here in the Netherlands (~€1100 (~$1475), versus ~$900 in the USA), so I'm waiting for that to correct itself, and/or for me to go to the USA again. (Ooh! Just realizing I'll go to Canada soon, and that it might be decently prized there, too. Hmm, possibilities! Although that might give problems with needing it repaired, if ever... Or are the USA/Canada one market as far as Nikon warranty is concerned?)

15. Posted by Q' (Travel Guru 1987 posts) 10y

yeah, I know the price of the 12-24mm. I just got a 15-30mm sigma for wide angle work. haven't had a chance to try it out much yet though.

why don't you go for a prime ? I was thinking of a 15mm prime just before I got a really great deal on the sigma.

16. Posted by Sander (Moderator 4834 posts) 10y

Well, my behaviour from 18-24 mm has been to never stick to one zoom there - it's always been a tradeoff between the least amount of distortion versus how much I wanted to get into the picture, and I feel it's been worth it to make that decision on a per-picture basis. I suspect the same will hold doubly for 12-18mm. Plus a prime would really _only_ be useful for landscapes, while with 24mm I could shoot some other things, too, in a pinch.

The 14mm f/2.8 does make me drool, but that's even more expensive (plus Bjørn isn't very positive about it on current DSLRs), and I wouldn't really know where to look for information on non-nikkor primes. (Not that there seem to be any real options anyway - I don't care for fisheye, so that removes most of the options, and the 14mm Tamron is even more expensive than the Nikon, which leaves only the 14mm Sigma if I didn't miss anything. Which might be a mite cheaper than the 12-24, but not worth it, given the above...)

[ Edit: Edited on Dec 8, 2006, at 5:53 PM by Sander ]

17. Posted by Sander (Moderator 4834 posts) 10y

(Meanwhile, I'm wondering what Purdy must be thinking about us.) ^_^

18. Posted by Q' (Travel Guru 1987 posts) 10y

the price for the prime is no doubt due to the speed vs. the speed of the zoom. does anybody really shoot landscapes at 2.8 ? I would think the 18-200mm or 18-70mm would be what you use the most. The prime would be mostly for landscapes, yes. Put it on when you need it.

Well, I'm probably going to keep the 70-300mm for now. Unless I can make a quick and easy sale. My other concern is how to replace my D70. Fuji's coming out with the S5Pro in Jan. and no doubt Nikon will have to come out with something to replace the D200 mid next year. That's a good time for me to look into a new body.

I was actually on MSN with a friend in California talking about fisheyes today. She was showing me this cheap lomo 35mm fisheye, which actually looks like a lot of fun. We were also talking panaramic tripod mounts. That's what I'd like. Now all I need is time to get back into shooting :-).

I think Purdy should avoid looking up how much this all costs.

19. Posted by Purdy (Travel Guru 3546 posts) 10y

Im sitting here google eyed wondering what strange language they are talking!!!!!!!! Give me 12mths and maybe l will understand half what you are on about!

note to self make sure and sign up for that photography course in New Year!!!!

20. Posted by Sander (Moderator 4834 posts) 10y

Quoting Q_

the price for the prime is no doubt due to the speed vs. the speed of the zoom. does anybody really shoot landscapes at 2.8 ? I would think the 18-200mm or 18-70mm would be what you use the most. The prime would be mostly for landscapes, yes. Put it on when you need it.

Well, I most often shoot landscapes, so I'm thinking I'd use the 12-24 at least as much as the 18-200. The latter would be my main walkaround lens for events or anyplace where I'm not certain what to expect, but the former would be on the camera by default anytime I went hiking.

Quoting Q_

Fuji's coming out with the S5Pro in Jan. and no doubt Nikon will have to come out with something to replace the D200 mid next year. That's a good time for me to look into a new body.

That'd be barely a year between general availability of the D200 and announcement of its replacement. I don't think that'll happen. (Although perhaps a D200s or somesuch could be conceivable, though I don't know what they'd improve... The thing is pretty much perfect as it is. Well, battery performance and auto white balance, perhaps... (If so, I'm rooting for firmware to bring the same improvement to the D200!)) :D
Instead I expect a D3 by mid next year, with its features trickling down into a D300 no sooner than early 2008 (announcement late 2007 if competition gets too fierce).

[ Edit: Edited on Dec 9, 2006, at 4:04 AM by Sander ]