Good deal?

L

lKoRTy

Senior Member
​Hello fellow D7100 owners! I am planning on joining your ranks and was wondering if this deal was good.,

Costco currently has a D7100 kit w/ 18-200 VRII, 32gb card, camera bag and wireless adapter for $1800. Would you say it's a good deal to go for? I am planning on getting a micro lens as well, since 18-200 will satisfy my range for a little while, before I get a telephoto lens.

​Thanks in advance!
 
B

Bill16

Senior Member
From what I hear it's a great nikon camera model. You can get a good idea of what good price for one is by checking ebay and amazon for what a new one is going for. :)
 
W

WhiteLight

Senior Member
The D7100 is a killer camera, you can pick it up without a doubt.
Though i am apprehensive about suggesting the 18-200.
It's not a bad lens, but not a great one either.
Longer the focal length coverage, lesser is the image quality.

I would advice you to get the 18-105 & a 40mm micro since you want it.
Or if you'd like a better macro lens, save up & buy it later, you could instead get the 35mm prime now
 
L

lKoRTy

Senior Member
Thank you all for a quick reply! That's what I was afraid of - that people who know, would say that 18-200 is not worth getting :) So I am certainly glad I've asked! I just assumed with it's a newer lens with VRII it does have good performance..

As a follow up, would you even suggest going with 18-105? My initial plan was getting three lenses - micro, all around and telephoto. The all-around was supposed to go everywhere with me, like the beach. But if it's not worth the money quality wise, should I go the route Jimx7 went in "Can I Go Home Now" thread and get a micro, 18-55 and 55-300 (70-300)? Like I said for the all around, in the beach example, I would like to be able to take shots close and of someone in the water, without having to change the lenses.

So I guess ultimately, what would be your suggestions for micro, all around and telephoto, or micro, telephoto and X? Price wise would prefer all three lenses under 2000. (if possible). And just for the sake of why not, throw in a wide-angle in there.

​Thanks again for quick replies, stopped me form pulling the trigger! :)
 
Last edited:
D

Don Kuykendall_RIP

RIP :(
I would still go with the 18-105 over the 18-55. Don't buy but one lens to begin with. Get the 18-105 and after you get used to the camera you will then know what you want and need.
 
L

lKoRTy

Senior Member
I have shot D90 with 18-105 before, so I am used to that range. That's why was looking for different variety of ranges now or 18-200 to begin with more longer reach.
 
J

John P

Senior Member
Keep in mind that image quality is relative to the shooter.
Meaning, depending on what you do with your pics. the 18-200 may suit your needs very well.
Do you post online, email and make small prints? If so that lens should work great for you.
If you make larger prints. It may be lacking.
 
L

lKoRTy

Senior Member
Usually I post my photos online, small prints maybe once a year. Large prints almost never. I don't mind getting two lenses over one, as long as quality is involved.
 
N

Nathan Lanni

Senior Member
The 18-200m is a great lens, especially if you get a good deal on it.

Here's a honest review of the lens. http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikkor_DX_18-200mm_VR_II/index.shtml

I have the d7100 and the 18-200 vr that I use as a walk around lens. I shoot landscapes and architecture and really like it. I know that unless it too far away, or super close I can likely get a shot without having to change lenses.

My son has been using it for stop action with his action figures @ about 18 inches. I also have a 35mm f2 which is a really great lens, but the 18-200m is a lot more flexible in different situations. The main drawback is the f3.5 so you give up light.

Here's one I did in low light late yesterday I shot in RAW. 22mm, ISO 1600, 1/125s and f5.6. Mind you this was my first outing on full manual mode, playing around with aperture, shutter speed and ISO. Shot about 50 or so at various distances and got 3 that are OK and this one IMO is the best of the 3. I converted it jpeg, and even then it's still a 6.5 mb file, which the forum doesn't allow. I think uploading it reduced the image to 85 kb or something, so a lot of the image quality was lost.

Get the 18-200mm - you'll love it.


Twilight Lake by teagueAMX, on Flickr

FWIW

Cheers.
 
Last edited:
W

Whiskeyman

Senior Member
lKoRTy said:
Would you get it again, over splitting between two lenses?
Click to expand...

Under the same circumstances, absolutely. For what i purchased it for, as a "Jack-of-All-Trades" lens, it served it's purpose well. It is a lens that I can put on a camera and use all day for casual shots. Do I still need my 80-200 F 2.8 lens? Absolutely! I still have a use/need for other, faster lenses within that focal length range, but I have no regrets about purchasing this lens at all.

And after trying it out this morning on my D90, it still works! The UV filter is shattered and the filter ring is bent on the front of the lens, and I can't seem to remove it without undue force. It appears that there are no scratches to the front element. I took a few test photos with it and I don't see a problem with the image. The zoom mechanism seems a bit restricted throughout the entire range, and it's a bit noisy when it focuses, but it does zoom and it does focus. I may send it to Nikon for a diagnosis.


WM
 
J

Jimx7

Senior Member
I would get the package at Costco
I went the ala carte route because I got a deal on the body only from Dell
Good luck and buy a reference book on the D7100 it does so many amazing things.
I'm still learning the difference from a truck-stop to an F-stop
PS the wireless adapter is a big plus
Jim
 
Top