 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / April 200718-200 VR in stock on B&H
Just called them and they confirmed, have it in stock for $749 http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=408518 &is=USA&addedTroughType=search&BI=1131&KW=BANNER1&KBID=1425&img=bh_wl.gif > Just called them and they confirmed, have it in stock for $749 > > http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=408518 &is=USA&addedTroughType=search&BI=1131&KW=BANNER1&KBID=1425&img=bh_wl.gif Oh ... so tempting. I am not sure how much the VR on this thing will help me ... and I do have and use the 18-70.  SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0 > vadim.omeltche...@gmail.com wrote: > > Just called them and they confirmed, have it in stock for $749 [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Thomas T. Veldhouse > Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0 I just heard that 18-200 VR is hard to find these days, I have several friends who have been on waiting lists at different dealers for the last 3-4 months. 18-70 is a fine lens too, I used to own it before I got the 18-200. > I am not sure how much the VR on this thing will help me > ... and I do have and use the 18-70. VR is *way cool* but if you have the 18-70 why not go for the 70-300VR for longer reach and less cost? Signaturem-m >> I am not sure how much the VR on this thing will help me >> ... and I do have and use the 18-70. > >VR is *way cool* but if you have the 18-70 why not go for the 70-300VR >for longer reach and less cost? Or the 70-200 f/2.8 VR if cost/size isn't an issue and low light capability is wanted. This also allows the option of extended range using TCs. FWIW, they must have got a shipment containing other items as I now see the US TC-14E-II is in stock as well. SignatureEd Ruf (Usenet2@EdwardGRuf.com) http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html > FWIW, they must have got a shipment containing other items as I now see the > US TC-14E-II is in stock as well. Must be- I received my Fieldscope 82mm today after being on back order for a month. Can't wait to give it a spin. Signaturem-m On Mar 30, 2:38 pm, "Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)" <egruf_usen...@cox.net> wrote: > On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:24:05 -0400, in rec.photo.digital.slr-systems M-M > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > -- > Ed Ruf (Usen...@EdwardGRuf.com)http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html I own both, the 18-200 VR and 70-200 VR. I bought the 18-200 VR and it is my "walk around" lens. I also take it with me when I travel, it's hard to beat the convenience and the extra reach it offers you comparing to the 18-70. The 70-200 VR is a totally different beast - I like it because of it's gorgeous bokeh (when wide open); however, it's not as easy to take with you, especially when you're site seeing on foot. It also attracts a lot of attention and makes candid photography (which I do a lot of) a bit challenging :) On Mar 30, 1:51 pm, vadim.omeltche...@gmail.com wrote: > On Mar 30, 2:38 pm, "Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)" > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > on foot. It also attracts a lot of attention and makes candid > photography (which I do a lot of) a bit challenging :) Same here. There is a place for both lenses. The 18-200 is a great walk-around and travel lens. It is unsatisfactory for nature shots or professional use. The 70-200 is Nikon's sharpest zoom. It is fast, but it is also heavy and unwieldy. At the wide end, you want the 17-55 f/ 2.8 DX. It is not VR, but it is also a fast lens and very sharp. Like the 70-200, it is a pro quality lens. (Of course, the only real use for a pro quality mid-range zoom is portraiture and weddings. I can't think of a reason an amateur would prefer the 17-55 over any of Nikon's less expensive zooms covering that range.) For superwide, you only have one choice if you stay with Nikon -- the 12-24 zoom. >> I am not sure how much the VR on this thing will help me >> ... and I do have and use the 18-70. > > VR is *way cool* but if you have the 18-70 why not go for the 70-300VR > for longer reach and less cost? I own the fine Tokina 70-200, but it is large and not easy to carry around for simple work. For tripod use, it is a WONDERFUL chunk of glass. SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0 >I own the fine Tokina 70-200, but it is large and not easy to carry around for >simple work. For tripod use, it is a WONDERFUL chunk of glass. You just need to put it in your head you are going to carry it around all the time and do it. Eventually, it is not that big a deal. SignatureEd Ruf (Usenet2@EdwardGRuf.com) http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.