![]() |
Originally Posted by vasudhir
(Post 1243855)
What's his budget and area of interest in photography. Since this is a DSLR, you need to keep in mind about the cost of lenses going forward. And Nikon lenses are anyday costlier than Canon ones. Rgds, Sudhir |
Originally Posted by vasudhir
(Post 1243855)
Nikon lenses are anyday costlier than Canon ones. |
Originally Posted by StarScream
(Post 1243007)
The 18-200VR is a fantastic lens for what it does. Yes, it is not the ultimate in quality but if you were to replicate its range with quality glass you will - a) spend a lot more b) carry a lot more weight c) probably not get VR/IS throughout the range. The lens is very good at many things and spectacular at none. Comparing it with quality lenses misses the point of what this lens is designed to do - give ultimate range and convenience in a compact, light-weight package. |
Originally Posted by finneyp
(Post 1244988)
ET, If I want the performance of a DSLR and travel as light as possible (with minimum lens), I have a option in 18-200 lens. Yes, the image quality at some range may not be at par with prime lens, but for some that compromise is fine. |
Originally Posted by extreme_torque
(Post 1244975)
If convenience is what anyone is after why buy a DSLR at the first place. There are a lot of ultrazooms out there which are cheaper than the cost of the 18-200 lens itself and give you more range + features. Besides I can replicate even greater range for cheap... a combo of Canon 18-55 IS + 55-250 IS for about 400$ but then that really isnt my thing. |
Originally Posted by finneyp
(Post 1244988)
ET, If I want the performance of a DSLR and travel as light as possible (with minimum lens), I have a option in 18-200 lens. Yes, the image quality at some range may not be at par with prime lens, but for some that compromise is fine. |
Originally Posted by StarScream
(Post 1245014)
There are a couple of assumptions in your post, extreme. Correct me if Im wrong. One, a Dslr implies that one has to carry a lot of kit or travel heavy. |
Originally Posted by StarScream
(Post 1245014)
Second, the 18-200VR is a crappy lens quality-wise and equivalent to p&s optics. |
Originally Posted by extreme_torque
(Post 1245020)
A kit lens and a 70-200 IS wont make much of a difference as far as weight is concerned. It will. My 80-200/2.8 is 1.5-2 kgs. That lens alone kills you as far as weight is concerned. No, its not as good and you can get much better quality by spending a little more on a quality glass but yes it wont be as convenient, but that isnt what I am looking for when clicking with a DSLR. |
Originally Posted by finneyp
(Post 1245036)
StarScream, do you face zoom creep issue on your 18-200VR ? |
Originally Posted by StarScream
(Post 1245033)
And with all my experience in photography I can tell you the guy behind the camera is what matters, not the equipment. A crappy lens (and the 18-200VR is not) can produce fantastic images in the hands of a master. |
Originally Posted by extreme_torque
(Post 1245046)
"The medium determines the message." I rest my case. |
Originally Posted by vasudhir
(Post 1243865)
I have got all my Camera equipment's insured through House Hold Insurance Policy with Oriental Insurance. It is insured against Theft, accidental damage, etc etc. The 150-500 is a good one. But you got to be lucky to get a good piece as there are lots of complaints on its quality. What equipment do you currently have on which you want to use a TC. I can probably help you to make the right decession. Rgds, Sudhir |
Originally Posted by gd1418
(Post 1245068)
My current gear is: Nikon F801, D80 & Fuji Finepix S602 Zoom Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 35-70mm f/3.3-4.5 Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED Nikon AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED Nikon Speed Light SB-24 & SB-400 Thanks Sudhir in advance....:) |
All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 04:54. |