AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm zoom, 3.5-5.6 G VR

It got dropped and a small piece of the mount area plastic broke off. Maybe other damage but I don't know. It cannot be mounted securely on the D3100 Nikon. The lens came as a "kit lens."

Nikon estimates $165 to repair + I'd have to pay shipping. New lens is around $200, maybe a little less + shipping.

Is it worth fixing? Is it something local camera places (I'm in Los Angeles) would even do?

Any other words of wisdom?

Hello fellow Hoggers - I have been considering upgrading my D5200 to either a D7200 or a D750 and I really need your expertise. All 3 of these cameras have roughly 24 megapixels. The D5200 and the D7200 are crop sensor cameras, and the D750 is a full frame camera. I've been doing a lot of research and reading and I have questions regarding the D750 to which I cannot seem to find answers that make sense to me given my current level of knowledge. I trust you to help me out here.

The D750 allows you to shoot in the DX mode. If I were to do this (shoot in the DX mode) it would be to achieve more reach for my wildlife and BIF shots with the intention of cropping and enlarging those images. I would use the DX (24 x 16) 1.5x Image Recording Option for this. I would be using it in FX mode for everything else. My questions are:

1. What would be the effect, if any, on the megapixel count id I were to shoot in the DX mode?
2. What would be the downside/consequences of shooting with an FX camera in DX mode with an FX lens attached?
3. What would the downside/consequences of shooting in DX mode with a DX lens attached.

I am leaning toward the D750 and am trying to figure out if I could use any of my existing Nikon lenses on it in the DX mode. I currently have the kit 18-55, the kit 55-300, an 18-105, and my Tamron 150-600 (which I understand is designed for use on both full frame and crop sensor cameras). I don't want to make an expensive, stupid mistake by purchasing the D750 and expecting to use it in DX mode and get the same image quality as I would with the D7200. On the other hand, I would hate to go ahead with the D7200 and decide a year later that I should have gone with the full frame D750. If I were to go the D750 route, I would probably purchase the 28-300 lens to go with it. (It all depends on the answers to my questions!) That lens (28-300) plus my Tamron 150-600 would be all I need for right now.

The reason I was considering moving up to the D7200 from my D5200 is that the D7200 has some features that my D5200 lacks and that I feel would make my photography "easier" - namely dual SD card slots, custom settings, DoF preview, easier access to important settings (the D5200 are mostly menu driven and it takes a while to get to what I need to change). The D750 got thrown into the mix when I found out you can shoot in DX format with it. I am just thinking that at some time in the not too distant future I will probably want to go FF - so why not now and skip the D7200. My D5200 will be my back-up no matter if I choose the D7200 or the D750 - we are solidly bonded! I have also considered other Nikon models and ruled them out for one reason or another.

More than likely, I have left out some critical piece of information. If so, let me know what, and I'll try to supply it.

Many thanks to all who are willing and brave enough to put in their 2 cents.

"Mike"

MY reply?? - Definitely Not so!


I have $59 invested in a Tripod that will hold 17 pounds... it is rock solid in every manner of speaking. I am sorry that so many here, spent too much for their gear. I have hundreds of dollars of gear that I bought, that I should have never bought ... So I get it... We all buy to meet our long term needs and sometimes just our short term needs... To each their own.... And to each their own mistakes.


But ... that said............ the OP asked the Group for recommendations on a good tripod to meed the needs he clearly stated for a price under $100. Many of us did that..... Many though, seemed to find issue with spending a measly $100.00 as a waste if money. Could their opinions be based on the fact that they spent too much themselves??


A perfect example...... ...... I spent PENNIES for my Radio Triggers .... PENNIES compared to those who spent Dollars for POCKET WIZARD Triggers.... Does that make either purchase wrong?? I say no .... But have I ever had a trigger failure .. even once? ... Not once!

I say that if the OP wants to find a good tripod for under a $100, he surely can. As long as he is not shopping the Big Box Store for a Sunpak..... LOL.... I have two of those leaning against a corner in my home. But he came here asking for opinions, so he probably won't go that route!

I wish the OP well in his selection of finding a good tripod that meets his needs and his budget.

I recently upgraded to a Nikon D7100 and am trying to determine my best choice of focus settings for general use. My choices for Autofocus are S for stationary subjects, C for moving subjects or A for a mode that works for both. Is there any reason not to choose A.

Then for my area mode I am trying to choose between Single Point, or Dynamic 9 point, 21 point, or 51 point. Is there any reason not to choose Dynamic 51 point. Does the focus quality degrade when you go to 51 point.

By the way I love that these choices can all be made with buttons and command dials as opposed to going into menus.

Thanks in advance for any help.

I shoot raw, process them in LR and then save them as JPEGS. I don't want to discard the original raw files, so I have been saving them in a separate folder labeled Raw. Why do I save the raw copies? I may want to go back and process them differently, and as software gets better, so do the results. As I accumulate more raw images, I can see myself duplicating all my picture folders. Everything would have a JPEG folder and a raw counterpart. An alternative would be to keep the raw images in with the JPEGS. I know hard drives are getting larger and cheaper, but I don't want to have a room full of them.

How do you deal with storing JPEGS and raw files?