Steve'sDigicams

jutei · Jul 20, 2006, 2:35 AM

Afrter having conversation in some other forum, I desided to with Nikkor 18-70 AF-S DX 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G and Nikkor 70-300 AF-G 70-300mm F/4,0-5,6 later. I'm hoping to find 18-70 second handed, coz it's pretty expensive for me. Luckily I have seen quite a lot of those lens second handed. It comes with d70 and for some reason many of the d70 users doesn't semm to need that.

chris89 · Jul 20, 2006, 5:05 AM

wow wait, you do know that the euro is worth more then the dollar at this point?
so if its $750, its around 625 euro

Stephen Hopkins wrote:

Quote:

That's less expensive than in the US, retail is around $750, or 860 euro. Due to supply issues they can go upwards of $1000 on eBay in the US, but that is starting to taper off a bit.

Stephen Hopkins · Jul 20, 2006, 7:29 AM

My bad, I went the wrong way with my conversion.

chris89 · Jul 21, 2006, 8:26 AM

ah all you usa people are lucky

everything seems to be cheaper for camera's

zygh · Jul 21, 2006, 9:42 AM

Not only for camers. Everything retail is cheaper there.

lesmore49 · Sep 24, 2006, 12:13 AM

Back in the Middle Ages, I had a Pentax 35 mm (still have) S1A, SLR and being a young Univ. student who was perennially broke, I bought some after market lens, a W/A and a Zoom.

I was never happy with their picture quality and I eventually replaced them with Pentax and Takumar lens-both made by Pentax. I have always been happy with the Pentax lens.

They became seldom used, expensive paper weights and I keep them around just to remind me of the fact that there always seems to be a good reason as to why some things are cheap.

Here's a couple of more cliches that seem appropos, there is no free lunch and if it seems to be too good of a deal, it probably is!

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with lens other than those made by the camera factory, I'm just saying be careful and check them out, first.

It's also true that some camera makers have made el stinko lens too as no one maker has a death grip on poor quality.

So the moral of this particular story is be careful with lens. Try them out and check out the pix, how do they feel, is the view through the viewfinder as clear, sharp and contrasty as the Nikon lens?

starriderrick · Oct 2, 2006, 11:56 PM

I bought a Sigma 28-300mm :?it's not as clear I had hoped for. super soft through out the full range.

I'll be selling it, my next lense will be a Nikkor 18-70mm AF-S DXf/3.5-4.5G

Oldtimer Curt · Oct 17, 2006, 11:24 AM

Jutei, as I suggested to Monx, you might consider the Tamron 28-300. It hasn't been off my D50 since I got it. I posted some pics in my reply to him. Don't want to repeat them here. Check it out.

JimC · Oct 17, 2006, 11:48 AM

chris89 wrote:

Quote:

sorry to ask a question in someone else's topic.. but:
do the 3rd party 18-200's have a stabilizer?? (like nikon VR)

Sigma recently announcedthe Sigma18-200mmf/3.5-6.3 OS DCAF Lens

It's stabilized (the OS stands for Optical Stabilization).

I don't know when it will begin shipping. Their US site is down right this second. But, here's a link to the press release on their UK site:

http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/18-200mm.htm

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Steve'sDigicams

Recent Camera Reviews

Most Active Forums

Most Popular Deals

Latest Feature Articles

Jul 20, 2006, 2:35 AM	#11
jutei Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 12	Afrter having conversation in some other forum, I desided to with Nikkor 18-70 AF-S DX 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G and Nikkor 70-300 AF-G 70-300mm F/4,0-5,6 later. I'm hoping to find 18-70 second handed, coz it's pretty expensive for me. Luckily I have seen quite a lot of those lens second handed. It comes with d70 and for some reason many of the d70 users doesn't semm to need that.

Jul 20, 2006, 7:29 AM	#13
Stephen Hopkins Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 76	My bad, I went the wrong way with my conversion.

Jul 21, 2006, 8:26 AM	#14
chris89 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 147	ah all you usa people are lucky everything seems to be cheaper for camera's

Jul 21, 2006, 9:42 AM	#15
zygh Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 531	Not only for camers. Everything retail is cheaper there.

Sep 24, 2006, 12:13 AM	#16
lesmore49 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Western Canada Posts: 3,076	Back in the Middle Ages, I had a Pentax 35 mm (still have) S1A, SLR and being a young Univ. student who was perennially broke, I bought some after market lens, a W/A and a Zoom. I was never happy with their picture quality and I eventually replaced them with Pentax and Takumar lens-both made by Pentax. I have always been happy with the Pentax lens. They became seldom used, expensive paper weights and I keep them around just to remind me of the fact that there always seems to be a good reason as to why some things are cheap. Here's a couple of more cliches that seem appropos, there is no free lunch and if it seems to be too good of a deal, it probably is! I'm not saying there is anything wrong with lens other than those made by the camera factory, I'm just saying be careful and check them out, first. It's also true that some camera makers have made el stinko lens too as no one maker has a death grip on poor quality. So the moral of this particular story is be careful with lens. Try them out and check out the pix, how do they feel, is the view through the viewfinder as clear, sharp and contrasty as the Nikon lens?

Oct 2, 2006, 11:56 PM	#17
starriderrick Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 62	I bought a Sigma 28-300mm :?it's not as clear I had hoped for. super soft through out the full range. I'll be selling it, my next lense will be a Nikkor 18-70mm AF-S DXf/3.5-4.5G

Oct 17, 2006, 11:24 AM	#18
Oldtimer Curt Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 16	Jutei, as I suggested to Monx, you might consider the Tamron 28-300. It hasn't been off my D50 since I got it. I posted some pics in my reply to him. Don't want to repeat them here. Check it out.