Camera Labs

Ah yes . . . wasn't meaning to run the 18-200 lens down - I've contemplated acquiring one myself. And two lenses are markedly less convenient, so I generally leave one on. For a general purpose lens the 18-200 is what I'd choose.

_________________
HCC
Nikon DSLRs, film cameras from Leica to Linhof

@ Hilary, I didn't take your comment as running down the 18-200, it's cool.

Cheers

_________________
Nikon D7000, D40X, Nikkor 18- 200 VR II, f3.5-5.6, 70-300 AF non VR, Kit Lenses.

Hi, i will buy a D7000 with 16-85VR (kit) this week, and i wanna buy an Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-D ED Macro (new) (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/80200.htm)
Whar are you thinking about the 80-200 lens?

I think you should hold fire before you buy the 80-200, gaining a bit more experience with the new camera and lens before committing.

And review further than just a certain Mr Rockwell, or at least take him as being tongue in cheek half the time.

Its important to realize what focal length you need.
200mm is not really long range in my opinion, often too short for wild life & zoo photography. (I had a Canon G9 compact camera before with 210mm, and it was just too short many times).

Nikkor 70-300mm is a great lens too and the extra 100mm is really really nice to have and you can buy a seperate real fancy macro lens too for about the same money you want to spend on your 80-200mm.

Unless of course you work in difficult light conditions then F2.8 would be nice too have. But 80-200mm sounds like an outdoor lens to me anyway.

So before you spend a lot of money on a lens make sure its one that you can use 100% of the time, and not 75% of the time.


The 80-200mm is not a REAL macro lens anyway. It does not have 1:1 magifications as a Nikkor Micro lens would have. So I would buy a seperate macro lens anyway. The macro options in zoom lenses are usually the close but no cigar kind of macro results.

I can assure you you will come across some situation with a 80-200mm where you bang your head and think: i really really really wish i had a 70-300mm lens right now (especially the more then 200mm part).

300mm sounds like a lot but it isn't, but its enough 95% of the time.

Welcome to the forum Gyono,

In reality, the lens you choose is what you intend to shoot, this is a personal choice.. The 18-200 captures most shots I want in street photography, festivals, marathons and the like without having to change a lens and miss a shot. For surfing shots I use a 70-300mm and at times find it falls short in length. For wild life and birds the wild life shooters on the forum recommend a minimum of 400mm.

Like many here suggesting lenses, the above is a personal choice for what I shoot and would be of no use to others, the answer for what lens you want is simple, "what do you intend to shoot and in what lighting conditions."


Cheers

_________________
Nikon D7000, D40X, Nikkor 18- 200 VR II, f3.5-5.6, 70-300 AF non VR, Kit Lenses.

Thanks guys!

I myself bought a D7000 as my first step into DSLR camera's. And as a hobbyist i absolutely love it!!

I'd say go for it!! Along with the body, i bought the 18-200mm VRII which is a great all round lens and the 35mm f/1.8. I rearely take off the 18-200mm though.

_________________
Nikon D7000, 18-200mm VRII, 35 f/1.8G,
Nissin Speedlite Di622 MK II
Tamrac Rally 4 Bag
Fujifilm Finepix XP10
Sony DSC-H9
Sony DSC-W130
Panasonic DMC-F1 (My 1st Digital Camera)

I find my D7000 much easier to operate then my Canon G9 compact camera. So nothing wrong with it as first DSLR. You should read he manual though with the camera on you lap. Run to all the options, menus and buttons once or twice and you know the camera.