foram_sheth

<p>thanks for the responses!<br>

Landrum Kelly: I don't have another lens as of now, but this occurred in both low light and good light, and I know that a slight whirring sound is normal, but this had a loud squeak sound like something needs to be oiled!<br>

I think its a faulty motor, am trying to see if I can replace it...<br>

Elloit: Thanks, I don't think its a mouse lol, but I'll just try to replace the piece to avoid any chances...also, thanks for the focus advice, you're right, the more I'll use it, the better acquainted I'll be with the settings</p>

 

<p>Hello</p>

<p>I recently bought the D7000 with the 18-105 lens kit, and though its a great camera, I have been having some issues while taking pictures<br>

Sometimes the picture won't focus at all, in which case I'm trying to click it but it won't work cause its not catching a focus point, what is this due to?<br>

And second and more important, when I point the camera to take a picture and half press the button, I can hear a squeaking sound as the autofocus shifts to the right focus, is that normal? Its a brand new camera and while I've heard a whirring sound with a brand like Canon, I expected something similar, but this is a loud squeak as it autofocuses....is this normal or did I get a defective piece and should just return it?<br>

Thanks</p>

 

<p>Hello<br /><br />I'm buying a D7000 and wondering if I should get the lens that comes with the kit, 18-105 <br />($1200)<br /><br />OR<br /><br />get a 30 mm f1.8 AND a 55-200mm f4 - 5.6<br />(body 900, 30mm - $200, 55-200 - $150)<br /><br />Either combination is about the same price in total, and maybe I would be better off with a prime and a zoom lens instead of the 18-105 which is a more general coverage and has decent reviews, but maybe my money is better used with the other lenses?<br /><br />I am a new photographer, and am turning this into a career slowly, and like to do lots of street photography, nature, and some event photography...<br /><br />Cheers<br />JNS</p>

<p>Hello</p>

<p>I'm buying a Nikon D7000 (changed my mind from the Canon 60d after using it for a week, I think the Nikon is superior in terms of picture quality, low light and color), but am confused about the lens pick<br>

The two kits available with the camera are:<br>

18-105 - $1200<br>

18-200 - $1500<br>

I heard that the 18-200 compromises on quality, but others are more than happy with it? So I'm not sure which to choose....<br>

Also, I was thinking of maybe getting the 50mm f1.8 with it? I heard its an excellent prime but is the quality difference so noticeable from the zoom lens?<br>

Alternatively, is it better to get just the body and a couple of primes?<br>

My budget is not really more than 1500, and I'd like to keep it that way<br>

My main interests are people / street photography, nature (I love taking shots of NYC in and around) and close-ups or tight shots<br>

Any suggestions and help are welcome, thanks!</p>

 

<p>Hello! Thanks for all the opinions...my head is spinning a bit now...<br /><br />The D7000 kit with the 18-105 DX VR is $1200 vs with the 18-200 is $1500....is the extra 300 worth it?<br>

I can't afford th 16-85 right now, but could add a prime 50mm f 1.8 to the kit, its like a hundred bucks...i like my pictures a little tight so don't mind the mild zoom, and I'd get better bokeh or picture quality using it than using the 50mm on my zoom lens right?<br /><br />Thanks!</p>

<p>Hello<br /><br />I am buying aNikon D7000 and am just overwhelmed with lens options....I just need some basic understanding for them<br />The two kits available with the body are 18-105 and 18-200 and someone said, 18-200, that'll be a crappy lens, why is that? Is it just because zoom lenses compromise quality of picture?<br /><br />My primary goal will be to do more people photography, street photography, some landscapes maybe, and I'd like to get lenses which are good for motion and low light too<br /><br />I don't have a very high budget and just want to understand also why some lenses are so much more expensive (like a 70-200 is more exp than an 18-200, why?)<br /><br />I've been told a 35 mm or 50 mm prime will be a good choice, and I think a 50 mm is good for portraits no? It shows the subject as is without zoom? While a 35,, would provide some zoom factor?<br>

And if I get the 18-105, why would I invest in another lens like the 16-85? Trying to understand as range overlaps no?<br>

<br /><br />Thanks for any help!!</p>