I'd have to visit and talk to the folks at TriState. I wouldn't want to
give a number
without having made the decision to go for another boat, which would be a
big
decision for me (not like trading up from a D70 to a D200).



I've decided to stay with my D70 body for now, although the D200 would be a
very nice upgrade. However, it's all I can do to not run out and get my
hands on this new lens that was released the same time as the D200. It
would appear to be the perfect default lens for a Nikon DSLR, and I actually
think I would get more benefit from spending $750 on this lens than on
upgrading the body itself. A great range of focal length and I'm a huge
believer in image stabilization technology. Fortunately, they are very hard
to come by right now, which is keeping me from joining the hunt.

http://tinyurl.com/dsevd

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 11:02:44 -0700, "RG" wrote:


I'd have to visit and talk to the folks at TriState. I wouldn't want to
give a number
without having made the decision to go for another boat, which would be a
big
decision for me (not like trading up from a D70 to a D200).



I've decided to stay with my D70 body for now, although the D200 would be a
very nice upgrade. However, it's all I can do to not run out and get my
hands on this new lens that was released the same time as the D200. It
would appear to be the perfect default lens for a Nikon DSLR, and I actually
think I would get more benefit from spending $750 on this lens than on
upgrading the body itself. A great range of focal length and I'm a huge
believer in image stabilization technology. Fortunately, they are very hard
to come by right now, which is keeping me from joining the hunt.

http://tinyurl.com/dsevd



That *is* a nice looking lens. Have you seen any reviews on it? I bought this one:
http://tinyurl.com/aruez and then decided it was too big to carry on the trip we
made. Now I'm considering selling it. I ended up with the 70-300mm lens,
http://tinyurl.com/cn9r5, with which I've been pretty happy.

--
John H.

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

That *is* a nice looking lens. Have you seen any reviews on it? I bought
this one:
http://tinyurl.com/aruez and then decided it was too big to carry on the
trip we
made. Now I'm considering selling it. I ended up with the 70-300mm lens,
http://tinyurl.com/cn9r5, with which I've been pretty happy.


I've read only one review, and it was very positive. It sure ought to be
for the money. In addition to the 18-70 kit lens, I also have the 70-300
zoom, the ED version. At the time, it seemed like the most logical
compliment to the 18-70 kit lens, and it was very affordable. However, in
practice, I find it is often too long, and I find myself switching back and
forth between the 18-70 and the 70-300 way too often. Either that or I will
often revert to my point and shoot when I have the 70-300 on the D70 and
need a shorter lens to get a shot off quickly. It's clumsy, and I don't
like it.

There are several inherent advantages this 18-200 lens offers over the
18-70/70-300 combo we now use. First and foremost is to have the majority
of the focal range of the combo in a single lens. You give up nothing on
the short end, and still have 350mm on the long end in 35mm equivalence.
11.1x range is not bad. I'd be more than willing to give up the very long
end to have the 18-200 range in a single lens. Much more convenient. From
what I can tell, it is fairly compact in size. Somewhere between the 18-70
and 70-300 in size, which I would find acceptable for a default walk-around
lens. Second, this lens is far superior to the 70-300 zoom. Much faster
focusing with the silent wave motor, just like the 18-70. And third, even
though this lens isn't really any faster nominally than the 18-70 and only
slightly faster than the 70-300, in practicality it is much faster due to
the VR technology. In most situations, image stabilization will give you
2-3 stops more speed than without. Huge feature, especially if you shoot
mostly hand-held, as I do. I have a very nice pair of Canon image
stabilized binocs, and what the image stabilization does for them has to be
experienced to be believed. My next lens purchase will absolutely have
image stabilization technology incorporated into it.

I'm just waiting for supply to catch up with demand, and maybe the price
will soften a bit. But I wouldn't expect that to happen in the next six
months.

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 12:30:36 -0700, "RG" wrote:


That *is* a nice looking lens. Have you seen any reviews on it? I bought
this one:
http://tinyurl.com/aruez and then decided it was too big to carry on the
trip we
made. Now I'm considering selling it. I ended up with the 70-300mm lens,
http://tinyurl.com/cn9r5, with which I've been pretty happy.


I've read only one review, and it was very positive. It sure ought to be
for the money. In addition to the 18-70 kit lens, I also have the 70-300
zoom, the ED version. At the time, it seemed like the most logical
compliment to the 18-70 kit lens, and it was very affordable. However, in
practice, I find it is often too long, and I find myself switching back and
forth between the 18-70 and the 70-300 way too often. Either that or I will
often revert to my point and shoot when I have the 70-300 on the D70 and
need a shorter lens to get a shot off quickly. It's clumsy, and I don't
like it.

There are several inherent advantages this 18-200 lens offers over the
18-70/70-300 combo we now use. First and foremost is to have the majority
of the focal range of the combo in a single lens. You give up nothing on
the short end, and still have 350mm on the long end in 35mm equivalence.
11.1x range is not bad. I'd be more than willing to give up the very long
end to have the 18-200 range in a single lens. Much more convenient. From
what I can tell, it is fairly compact in size. Somewhere between the 18-70
and 70-300 in size, which I would find acceptable for a default walk-around
lens. Second, this lens is far superior to the 70-300 zoom. Much faster
focusing with the silent wave motor, just like the 18-70. And third, even
though this lens isn't really any faster nominally than the 18-70 and only
slightly faster than the 70-300, in practicality it is much faster due to
the VR technology. In most situations, image stabilization will give you
2-3 stops more speed than without. Huge feature, especially if you shoot
mostly hand-held, as I do. I have a very nice pair of Canon image
stabilized binocs, and what the image stabilization does for them has to be
experienced to be believed. My next lens purchase will absolutely have
image stabilization technology incorporated into it.

I'm just waiting for supply to catch up with demand, and maybe the price
will soften a bit. But I wouldn't expect that to happen in the next six
months.


I agree with everything you've said. I love the VR on my big lens, but the lens
itself is *big* and heavy. I don't like carrying a huge camera bag just because of
one big lens.

Now, if I could only find a buyer for this one... http://tinyurl.com/aruez

--
John H.

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

That's a fine lens. I very briefly considered it over the much less
expensive 70-300 ED. I wouldn't have missed very much the last 100mm
that the 70-300 offers, and would have loved to have the VR and the
speed of that bad boy. But ultimately, I wasn't willing to schlep
around a lens with that much bulk to it and wasn't in the mood to lay
down that much dinero either. But this new 18-200 hits a sweet spot
for me. Perfect walkaround range, high quality, reasonably compact,
and a reasonable price point between the budget-priced 70-300 ED and
the $1,000+ higher end lenses. It's not blazing fast, but with VR and
the D70's ability to shoot well at higher ISO ratings, it's fast
enough. Nikon's gonna sell a boatload of them.

"RG" wrote in message
oups.com...
That's a fine lens. I very briefly considered it over the much less
expensive 70-300 ED. I wouldn't have missed very much the last 100mm
that the 70-300 offers, and would have loved to have the VR and the
speed of that bad boy. But ultimately, I wasn't willing to schlep
around a lens with that much bulk to it and wasn't in the mood to lay
down that much dinero either. But this new 18-200 hits a sweet spot
for me. Perfect walkaround range, high quality, reasonably compact,
and a reasonable price point between the budget-priced 70-300 ED and
the $1,000+ higher end lenses. It's not blazing fast, but with VR and
the D70's ability to shoot well at higher ISO ratings, it's fast
enough. Nikon's gonna sell a boatload of them.


I am happy with the compact high quality point and shoot digitals these
days. I remember years ago, when I had long lens, heavy camera's and did my
own development. Maybe age has something to do with it. If I was a
professional photog, making money with the camera, then I would be inclined
to go for the bigger, heavier units, but for self satisfaction and memory
refreshers, I love the digitals. And a carrying a 6 oz. camera though a
jungle or on a long day touring a city, sure beats a 20# bag and camera

It's quite amazing how good of a digital camera $200 will buy these
days. I started shooting 35mm film in high school, and progressed
through various 35mm camera systems over the years. I was a fairly
early adopter to digital. I bought one of the very first Olympus
C3030's to hit my town in the spring of 2000. $1000 for a 3mp point
and shoot. Holy crap. But that little camera completely renewed a
waning interest in photography for me. The key for me is what can be
done with modest skills and inexpensive software in digital post
processing. It's just so easy to make a marginal photograph decent and
a good photograph outstanding.

But I never liked handling the point and shoot. I missed the feel,
intuitive controls, and responsiveness of my 35mm film cameras. So
earlier this year I bought two new cameras. I bought another Olympus
point and shoot and a Nikon D70 DSLR. The Oly is a 4mp water resistant
model I purchased at Costco for $200. I bought it simply to always
have in the boat bag. It's small, lightweight, water resistant, and
takes amazingly good pictures. But I hate shooting with it. It just
doesn't act, feel, or respond like a real camera to me. The controls
are diminuitive and the menus are illogical to me. The Nikon on the
other hand, felt like an old friend the first time I held it in my
hands. Completely intuitive and instantly responsive. Therefore, I've
shot thousands of shots with the Nikon compared to maybe several
hundred with the Oly this year. But there's been times I've gotten
great shots simply because the Oly was in proximity while the Nikon was
at home, so having both seems to work well for me.

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:38:44 GMT, "Bill McKee" wrote:


"RG" wrote in message
roups.com...
That's a fine lens. I very briefly considered it over the much less
expensive 70-300 ED. I wouldn't have missed very much the last 100mm
that the 70-300 offers, and would have loved to have the VR and the
speed of that bad boy. But ultimately, I wasn't willing to schlep
around a lens with that much bulk to it and wasn't in the mood to lay
down that much dinero either. But this new 18-200 hits a sweet spot
for me. Perfect walkaround range, high quality, reasonably compact,
and a reasonable price point between the budget-priced 70-300 ED and
the $1,000+ higher end lenses. It's not blazing fast, but with VR and
the D70's ability to shoot well at higher ISO ratings, it's fast
enough. Nikon's gonna sell a boatload of them.


I am happy with the compact high quality point and shoot digitals these
days. I remember years ago, when I had long lens, heavy camera's and did my
own development. Maybe age has something to do with it. If I was a
professional photog, making money with the camera, then I would be inclined
to go for the bigger, heavier units, but for self satisfaction and memory
refreshers, I love the digitals. And a carrying a 6 oz. camera though a
jungle or on a long day touring a city, sure beats a 20# bag and camera


I had the Nikon 5700, a good little point and shoot. What drove me up the wall,
continuously, was the shutter lag. With the DSLRs, it's virtually nonexistent. There
are other advantages as well, but that one was all it took for me.

--
John H.

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes