nadopix

I've never used the 16-85, but when I need a good lens review I look online. It's not hard to find quality reviews. When several good reviewers are consistantly positive in what they say about the lens, generally the lens is a solid performer.

Also, don't write off the extra 2mm between the two lenses; at the wide end, 2mm is a MUCH greater angle of view than, say 200mm vs 202mm.

Look at your favorite travel and landscape images. My guess is they'll be shot from a wide angle out to 105 at the most. Read up on street photography, and you might discover telephoto lenses aren't used as much as the 35/50mm range.

And one final thing...focal length is only 1/4 of the equation-- max F-stop is the rest. Perhaps you should broaden your search to a lens that goes down to f2.8 at least. As I grow in photography, I'm replacing slow lenses with fast ones. Tonight I was a chaperon at a youth group function on the beach. As the sun set I was still taking hand-held shots (no VR) of fast-moving youth...all because I could get down to f2.8. (and I was using my new 24-85 which cost me 400 bucks used from Adorama).

Just sold my 18-200. As I posted in another forum, the lens is best described as a jack-of-all trades, master-of-none lens. Do you want pro images or just images? This is not a pro lens.

The San Diego skyline...my backyard. Click on my name to see more from this beautiful area.

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/7441918&size=lg<div></div>

Chris, I didn' t even consider Pendleton...now that's got me thinking (because stars and stuff is what I'd like to shoot).

Thanks a lot for the responses, photographers! Richard, I'll look you guys up. I'm a member of polyphoto, but open to others (as that group fills up). That book looks good as well. semper fi

...the 18-200mm is an expensive piece of low-quality, jack-of-all-trades (master-of-none) glass. I just sold mine. If casual photography is what you're all about, then go for it.

Disclaimer: I haven't used either D300 or D80, BUT I have extensive experience with the D200. My thoughts:

1. A camera is only as good as it's lenses. You could buy the d300, put a cheap lens on it and get junk pictures taken at a really high burst of speed. Instead consider the less qualified but highly rated D80 and put good lenses on it. You should even be able to find a deal on a new D80 since it's been out for a while.

2. Once you buy a body and lenses, make sure you have dough for a good tripod, memory cards, software, lighting equipment (some of which you can rent, but still...), cleaning supplies, camera bags...a good photo setup is more than just the camera body.

 

Bottom line: $3000-$3500 is a lot of cash; I wouldn't suggest putting it all in one spot.

Excluding the most dire predicitors (and those who believe them), a 1 year market "hiccup" (still not officially a recession) is a blip on anyone's screen. Don't assume this thing will destroy Canon, Nikon or any other long-standing company. Canon and Nikon won't go belly up until the entire industry does.

Photographers: Thanks for all the info. I wasn't able to take the Hassy out this weekend, but will soon (a full moon isn't good for star trails...)

What are the best spots for night photography alond the southern California coast? Is it best to move inland?

<div></div>

Yeah, I know star trails are easy (one reason I want to do them). But thats night-only photography. I thought I'd mess around during the day time, too.

Great responses! I expect Calumet to be knowledgeable, but I want to ask the right questions about the gear.

Thanks for the input. Downloading the manual is great advice!

and I'm not sure which model. Whatever Calumet had.

Thanks for the info. I'll research reciprocity failure.

I've always been a DSLR shooter. This weekend I'm renting a film Hallesblad with color film, mainly to explore its

uses and take extra-long star exposure. I also reserved a 50mm lens and spot meter. What are the main

differences between DSLRs and film MF? What should I pay particular attention to? Any pointers? Anyone else

experimented like this?

Good book, especially for someone who struggles to properly (or creatively) expose that perfect sunset, portrait or any sort of shot.

Selling this thing. Unfortunately when I bought it, it was going for 1G...ouch. Can't

get that much for it now, but I can (and will) put the money towards the 17-55.

Because the 18-200 is an amateur lens, it's slow and not as sharp as some other

similarly priced lenses. I'm certainly not a pro, but in the interest of self-

improvement, why would use flawed glass? This jack-of-

all-trades is certainly a master of none.

So what's good about this lens? If you're not planning on serious photography,

don't want to change lenses a lot and wish to pack light...buy this lens.

PS I own the 70-200 and it's phenominal.<div></div>

"...certainly not going to bring a tripod."

 

Why not? Get VR then definitely, but I'd highly recommend at least some sort of extra support (mono pod, bean bag, etc)

RRS BH-55 all the way. I use the 40 and it's awesome (ie versatile, quick, durable)

...and the best thing about California is that you're within driving distance of the country's most diverse and adventurous terrain.

Shun, thanks. It helps to know they're not sellign anything. =) I guess I should go back to using watermarks on my photos (and I always use low-res!)

...and I think there's some on emaborder.201mb.com

Thats right! The site is www.gjart.cn

I found them by casually googling my name. Using Googles translation service I

think they might be selling them Either way they don't have my permission. Am I

alone? Anyone else see there's on here? Can I do anything legally?

Alfonso--under conditions the dust was really big. Most of my shooting the past 2 years was in JTNP, and dust there can get bad.