Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 11, 2006, 10:30 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7
Default

Just received notice that lens is in stock at B&H, Ken
ark.ken is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 21, 2007, 10:47 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
The Scubbler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 294
Default

I just got one and feel like I've found gold ! Wow, are these things hard to find. But one advantage of buying now is that the first batch are gone and I'm told there were a few with problems. I understand that the latest ones have received "extra attention" and should be reliable. We'll see. But it is a remarkable lens and the VR does work and even I can hand hold a full zoom.

Shaky Steve




The Scubbler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2007, 12:49 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 6
Default

I just got one from Ritzcamera. It is remarkable the difference VR makes-this is my first VR lens, it won't be my last!
sawman91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2007, 1:19 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

sawman-

Does the Nikkor 70-300mm VR lens work well as a "walk around" lens? My thought was to use it in place of the Nikkor 18-200mm VR lens. I have a Nikkor 12-24mm lens, so I have the wide angle area already covered.

MT/Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2007, 5:10 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 6
Default

I've only had it a short time, but I would consider it a walkaround "tele-lens". The lens has a pretty good heft to it, but not like a 70-200 VR. I got this lens so I could carry a tele and not have to use a tripod all the time.

Are you happy with the 12-24? I was looking at that as my next lens, I only go to 18mm now.

Thanks,
sawman91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2007, 9:04 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

sawman-

The Nikkor 12-24mm is a really great wide angle lens. I really like what that lens can do. I think you are very correct. The Nikkor 70-300mm VR is indeed a viable alternative lens to the Nikkor 18-200mm VR, and needI mention the fact that it is also $(US)200 less in price.

That has to count for something. Perhaps the 18-200mm VR lens is just a tad bit over rated and over priced as well. Oh well, that is just my opinion, for what it might be worth, as of today, 01/22/07.

MT/Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2007, 11:47 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 6
Default

I think i confused you, I was comparing my 70-300 VR to the pro 70-200 VR, a much bigger tele lens (and about 3x the $). I am pretty sure the 70-300 is bigger than the 18-200 VR.I would rather have the extra reach (v. 18-200)& have to deal with multiple lenses.

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"Bill
sawman91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2007, 3:35 AM   #8
rey
Senior Member
 
rey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 949
Default

I used to have the 18-55 kit lens and the old 70-300G, I now have the Tokina 12-24 and the Nikon 18-200VR, and I think there is a pretty big gap between 24mm and 70mm. But the gap is workable if you're only shooting either a wide landscape or telephoto.

But I think in general, there is a reason why Nikon's most popular pro lens are the 17-55mm F/2.8 and the 28-70mm F/2.8 -- it's a sweet spot range for wedding shooters and non-studio portraits (basically for shooting people).

One thing you can do is pick up the 70-300VR, and try it with the 12-24. If you feel the gap is too much, you can always pickup a used 18-70mm for around $200.

I've seen several pics of the 70-300VR, and I'm really impressed by it. It's also relatively light, so it's great for hiking. But I love my 18-200VR too much and for $750, I still think it's a great buy compare to the other stuff I spend my money on for this hobby. One of these days I'll be able to afford the 17-55mm F/2.8 or the 28-70mm for "better" image quality, but I'll probably keep the 18-200VR since it's just too flexible to let go. (Unless of course, an 18-200 VR F/2.8 comes along)

rey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2007, 1:31 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Rey-

Thanks very much for the feedback. I went ahead and ordered the Nikkor 70-300mm VR, because I have the Nikkor 12-24mm and the 18-70mm (left over from my D-70) to cover the gap.

Once I get it, I will post some samples. Thanks again.

MT/Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2007, 2:23 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Ronnie948's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 721
Default

mtclimber wrote:
Quote:
sawman-



That has to count for something. Perhaps the 18-200mm VR lens is just a tad bit over rated and over priced as well. Oh well, that is just my opinion, for what it might be worth, as of today, 01/22/07.
The 18mm to 200mm "VR" Nikon lens I have is not over-rated or was it over-priced for the quality photography it performs. Believe Me when I say it is worth every cent. I'm betting the 70mm to 300mm "VR" will probably be just as good.

Ronnie
Ronnie948 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:33 AM.