Question for Nikon users (Page 4): Save your money, sell what you have and buy Sony. Better gear.

Carl D Loc: Albemarle, NC.

Save your money, sell what you have and buy Sony. Better gear.

steve_stoneblossom Loc: Rhode Island, USA

rmorrison1116 wrote:

I have the opertunity to purchase a really clean u... (show quote)

Your signature says you own a lot of Canon 'stuff'. Why are you so taken with the 7200? It's a fantastic camera, and you say it's a great price, but if it forces you to make additional purchases (which is your case), is the price still great?

If your wife is anything like mine, I'm sure she'll be thrilled when you try to justify new lenses for your new camera. And maybe a new flash.

It's not my place to decide for you if it's in your budget. And by no means am I trying to imply you should only buy what you need, and go without what you want. Will the 7200 do something for you that any of your other cameras will not, or do you just want it because it's a great camera?

Personally, I find that purchases made primarily because 'it's a great price' are the ones I regret the most. If you've got your heart set on it, would you consider selling off some of your gear to add to your "for photography" account?

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Sounds like Steve has been eavesdropping on my wife. :roll: :roll: :lol: :lol:

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

It's not unusual for a person to have more than one system. I own both Nikon & Olympus digital cameras. Back when I shot film, I owned even more of a variety. I use my older "orphaned" manual focus Minolta, Konica, Leica screw mount & other lenses on my Oly bodies with adapters. They are all tools in my box, to use to their best abilities

steve_stoneblossom wrote:

Your signature says you own a lot of Canon 'stuff'... (show quote)

steve_stoneblossom Loc: Rhode Island, USA

DaveO wrote:

Sounds like Steve has been eavesdropping on my wife. :roll: :roll: :lol: :lol:

My brother maintains "It's us against them...".

Parmar

Best is Nikon 18-200 vr may cost about $ 250.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

My wife doesn't know one brand from another, thus I can keep her in the dark on purchases as long as I pay cash & not charge them.

steve_stoneblossom wrote:

My brother maintains "It's us against them...".

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

"Best" is subjective & if it truly was the "best', everyone would have one. I shoot a lot of macro & this lens would definitely not be in the running for me. What the OP should get depends on what it is that they are looking to use the lens for, their budget & any other factors that may impact their decision...

Parmar wrote:

Best is Nikon 18-200 vr may cost about $ 250.

steve_stoneblossom Loc: Rhode Island, USA

Screamin Scott wrote:

It's not unusual for a person to have more than one system. I own both Nikon & Olympus digital cameras. Back when I shot film, I owned even more of a variety. I use my older "orphaned" manual focus Minolta, Konica, Leica screw mount & other lenses on my Oly bodies with adapters. They are all tools in my box, to use to their best abilities

I have nothing against diversity. More power to you if you can manage different systems. I, however, find myself chimping my gear when I switch from one body to the other, let alone multiple brands. Same thing happens to me when I switch vehicles- if I'm not careful when driving the wife's car, I shift gears when I think I'm putting on the windshield wipers!

steve_stoneblossom Loc: Rhode Island, USA

Screamin Scott wrote:

My wife doesn't know one brand from another, thus I can keep her in the dark on purchases as long as I pay cash & not charge them.

Unfortunately (for my photo budget) the wife is CFO in my house. Not much slips by.

Franku Loc: Wallingford, PA and Parrish, Fl

How much is your Lens budget?

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

rmorrison1116 wrote:

I have the opertunity to purchase a really clean u... (show quote)

Photography is more fun when you have several lenses for different effects and reach including macro.. But that being said, reach is only one small part of the selection criteria. Inside the lens there are elements and groups to reduce distortion, vignetting aberration, coating to increase contrast, saturation reduce flares, AF speed, motors, aperture blades for bokeh, weather sealing, etc, etc.

Purchasing used on high end professional lenses from Nikon is great. Let me give you another option among all the other recommendations, the 24-120 f/4 is an exceptional lens with all the features of the professional Nikon series including weather sealing.

Carl D Loc: Albemarle, NC.

steve_stoneblossom wrote:

I have nothing against diversity. More power to you if you can manage different systems. I, however, find myself chimping my gear when I switch from one body to the other, let alone multiple brands. Same thing happens to me when I switch vehicles- if I'm not careful when driving the wife's car, I shift gears when I think I'm putting on the windshield wipers!

I agree with you completely. This is why I sold all of my Canon and Nikon gear in favor of Sony gear. I now have less gear that I can due more with. I really like the fact that I have one battery type. The body may not be identical but are so close to being the same that I don't notice.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

steve_stoneblossom wrote:

Unfortunately (for my photo budget) the wife is CFO in my house. Not much slips by.

Mine is more of a don't ask/don't tell partner when it comes to hobbies. She didn't need particulars when I purchased three lenses in the last eight months,but the camera I pre-ordered could stimulate some varied forms of criticism when it arrives. :roll: :roll:

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

That may be true, but in looking to save money, I buy any number of older manual focus lenses. Unless you are referencing Sony's mirrorless line, the older MF lenses from Minolta will not mount on their current DSLR's without an adapter. I have several older Minolta lenses that I use with adapters on my Olympus cameras. while they work, I still have to buy & use adapters in order to use them. Sony has always been a proponent of "proprietary" items & their AF lens line isn't exactly inexpensive. Yes, other OEM's line can be costly as well, but with Nikon, I can still use older tech to reduce costs & many of the advantages with newer lenses can be compensated for in post...

Carl D wrote:

I agree with you completely. This is why I sold all of my Canon and Nikon gear in favor of Sony gear. I now have less gear that I can due more with. I really like the fact that I have one battery type. The body may not be identical but are so close to being the same that I don't notice.