Christmas Dilemma

[dberryhill]

<p>My wife knew I had a not so secret lust for the d700. So, spending more money than she should, she bought me one for Christmas. But she also allowed the salesman at B&H to talk her into getting the 18-200VR lens. He told her it was a good match for the d700. That surprised me. I've bought from B&H since the 70s, and have been pleased with their integrity. After getting the 18-200, I thought that I could put it one my d200 and use it as my 'carry around in my truck' outfit. Many of the pictures I have liked have been those that I just came upon. So, with the d200/18-200 combo, I'd be ready for anything, and if it were to get stolen, it wouldn't be the end of the world.<br>

I could use the d700 and my primes (50 and 85) for portraits and other situations where I know in advance what I'm going to be shooting.<br>

But then, after taking some shots with the d700, I reconsidered. It's a great camera. Will I be happy using the d200? So, instead of keeping the 18-200, why not send it back and trade it for the 24-70 or the 70-200VR? That would obviously dig the financial hole deeper. But, before I get too old to see through a viewfinder, I'd like to work with really top-notch equipment. I want to see what I can do.<br>

Therein lies the dilemma. Any and all thoughts would be much appreciated.</p>

 

[rick_helmke1]

I'd hang on to the D200 because a backup is always a good thing. The lens not so much although that is strictly a personal opinion. If you can get your money back out of it I'd upgrade. My personal preference is the 80-200/2.8 over the 70-200 and you ought to be able to find one at KEH for much less money. Rick H.

[Matthew Brennan]

<p>That B&H saleman needs to be executed at dawn, but will no doubt instead recieve a certificate / medal from management....... fancy recommending a DX lens for an FX camera...............that leaves me gob smacked - well beyond just amazed.<br>

If you want to use your new D700 then send it (18-200mm VR DX) back pronto.........and try to get a cash return and then run away fast.........</p>

[dan_brown4]

<p>I've never seen or heard of anthing like that from B&H. Sales must be way off, and the staff is hustling hard.</p>

<p>I'd send the uber-zoom bak and keep the D200, FWIW.</p>

<p> </p>

[richard_beisigl]

<p>I would contact Henry Posner at B and H and explain to him what the salesman did. Mr. Posner has been very good when it comes to working with people who have problems with B and H.</p>

[Rene11664880918]

<p>Doug.... I don't live in the US so I can say anything about B&H. So far everyone here talks so well about them. But a DX lens on an FX camera? I supposed the salesman must be a new person being trained! Too bad you didn't mention B&H in the title of your thread. The reason being that I noticed many times when B&H is in the subject someone from B&H always reply right away. <br>

I would return the lens and get an FX lens for a D700. I am sure they will take care of you! Good luck!</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>i would return the 18-200 pronto. i'd also consider getting another prime, like the 35/2, instead of digging a deeper financial hole.</p>

[dennis_d._hardenburger]

<p>Doug<br>

Send the 18-200 back and get the 80-200 afd you will be very happy with it.<br>

I understand your age comment, as I am retired and it was a real spurge for me when I bought my D3 ( before the D700 came out) my first digital camera, I have been so happy with it for the last eight months.<br>

Spurge and get the lens you want, you will enjoy it for ever.<br>

Good luck<br>

Dennis</p>

[robertbody]

<p>Justification for more gear is eventually justified in ones mind... it's a guilty justification... leads to future guilty decisions. Better gear will inspire, but limits have to be put on.<br>

That's what I tell myself, so that i don't go and buy a D3 tomorrow. I had my D300 since April and when I got it, I was replacing a D200, with my own justification of 1) few dead pixels 2) 90,000 shutter clicks. Also 3) high ISO performance. I didn't have the D300 for a month and I already wanted D700 :-). I didn't get it, I still have D300, now at 68,000 clicks since April. It's been motivational to take pictures with the new toy, and I have taken my best shots since April, but really it's not the camera by itself, but it is motivating.<br>

Having 'backup cameras' is necessary if you are getting paid for your work, otherwise it's a luxury you can do without. Especially since prices drop with new ones coming to market, so that D200 you keep as backup, you might do without and buy in the future, for less. It's tempting to keep 2 cameras though, for about 30 days i kept my old D200 and new D300, and took pictures of each other :-).<br>

<img src="http://www.robertbody.com/things08/images/2008-06-07-sup-d200-1355.jpg" alt="" width="750" height="500" /><br>

<br /> I would say you should find a balance between quality and expense,<br>

* sell D200 [wisely]<br>

* keep D700<br>

* return the 18-200, and for the time being don't get anything in its place, get something in the future when it's something you know you want for sure, rather than now trying to "get something for the money you are returning the 18-200mm for"</p>

<p>I have D300 with 17-35mm [new this year too, replacing 18-35mm], 50mm f/1.8 and 105mm. My 17-35mm is my primary, I use 50mm when i need something a litle more tele, and 105mm is my tele and macro too. On days like today, shooting variety of people doing things left and right, I wish for a D700 with 24-70mm to use as my primary and keeping my 17-35mm and having 70-200mm for tele, but that is $1200+$1600+$1600=$4400 extra [-$1000 for my D300, -$600 for my 105mm] -- so $2800 to be able to get focal lengths similar to what i already have. Doesn't make much sense to do, but i would do if i could :-), financially. It's easy to go overboard with gear. Stepping up from D200 or D300 to D700 makes most sense -- bigger viewfinder, seeing whole image with glasses on, FULL FRAME and high ISO.</p>

<p>Less is more......... single toy twice a year...</p>

[albertdarmali]

<p>The salesman probably is not very into photography or new. 18-200mm is really not that bad for non purist photographer because it's convenient. But then again he might just recommended that because it's your wife who's buying the equipment (read: common assumption that woman is not a serious photographer).<br>

But yeah, just return it if you don't want it. Lens will be with you even after you change your D700 in the future, so you better get something you really like. If you wanna sell the D200, sell it now while it still have some sort of value.</p>

[keith_durnford]

<p><em>W18-200mm is really not that bad for non purist photographer because it's convenient"</em><br>

Thats as maybe but its really is not much cop on a D700 beings as its a Dx lens.<em><br /> </em></p>

[dberryhill]

<p>Wow! My thanks to you all for your informed and helpful insight, and for your time. As much as I hate to return a shiny new toy, the 18-200 is going back for a refund. I'll likely add the 35/2.0 soon, as Eric suggested, since I'd like a prime a little wider than 50mm. Then, assuming the bank account eventually recovers, I'll add either the 80-200 or the 70-200vr. I'll probably just keep the d200 and carry it with the kit lens (18-70) in my truck. I've used the 18-70 a lot since I first got a d70 in 2004. I know its limits, but I like it</p>

[oskar_ojala]

<p>I think that you made the right choice; I don't think you will be using the D200 much. For walk-around stuff the high-ISO performance and dynamic range of the D700 is just so much better than that of the D200. Unfortunately, there is no such good all-around lens for the D700 at present time, but of course there are many interesting lenses to look at in the meantime...</p>