13 replies to this topic

[Steve M]

I knew it was going to happen and the one time I didn’t take caution it happened.

My Tri-pod is not the best. I always worried the release was going to let go of the camera some day. So I always wrapped my strap around the tripod so if it fell it couldn’t go far. I never had a problem nor did the release ever let go. I bought a new strap that uses the tap that the tripod uses so I had to take the strap off. Yes you guessed it and down the camera went to the concrete. It landed on the lens. The lens was knocked off the camera. I picked it all up and could see no damage or scratches. I had a lens filter on so didn’t worry about the glass. Wiped the snow off everything and put together and thought everything was fine. But today I noticed the lens is only being held on one side. First fear was it was the camera but my other two lens fit tight. It still takes good pictures but if I go vertical the camera won’t focus unless I hold the lens up. I can flip it and then fine.

I don’t want to use the lens anymore as I worry with it flopping it may do damage to the camera.

The lens was the nicer of the two I got with the package. It was a AF-S DX NIKKOR
18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR II. I find to replace it I will spend around $250. I can buy the predecessor to this lens for about $150. Not sure I want to do that.

Can I buy a lens even if another brand that will me more for about the same price or a little more? My wife and I (love her very much) have these contest with close up of flowers. She wins too much. LOL. Something that will do closeups better.

I know I have wanted a wide angle lens but I don’t think there is such a lens that does good all around also.

What is everyone’s suggestions.

[esrandall]

Sorry for the loss -- that really stinks.  Regarding the 18-55 VRII, you should be able to find that used for less than $150.  Don't let used lenses scare you, just make sure the seller knows what they're talking about.  Tamron or Sigma make a faster version of that kit lens, but they are more expensive.  I'm a flower shooter (about 90% of what I do), and I use a Tamron 90mm macro G2.  Once you use the macro lens, it's tough to go back to a close focus, kit style lens.  I have a Nikon 24-120 F4, and while it focuses reasonably close, the level of detail shot wide open on the macro lens -- smokes the kit lens at any F--stop.  If you are exclusively a tripod shooter, I see a lot of flower shots on the photo sites (500px, etc.) with people using the Nikon 55-200, and a close-up filter.  They get nice detail, and some magnification, too.  I shoot more artsy macro (sharp in the middle, blurring out to the edges) so a macro lens wide-open, to maybe F5.6, is all I ever need.

 

Good luck!

[Merco_61]

The Tamron 17-50/2.8 in the sharper, non-VC version is ~$300 from B&H. A good sample works better than I thought on the D7200. I used mine extensively the week ending January 14. One week, one camera, one lens week ending January 14 2018 - Mini-Challenges, Member Contests, and Games - NikonForums.com

 

The first 47 in this gallery are shot with the Tamron on a D300.

17-50 - Gallery - NikonForums.com The rest are the photos from the January week.

 

It is far from a macro lens, it goes to a reproduction ratio of 1:4.5, but it does so with very little CA. The 18-55 will get you closer, but I am not sure how much.

 

A Tamron or Tokina short tele macro lens, or a used MicroNikkor 105 of some kind will get you much sharper flower shots than any zoom, but they aren't cheap. If you can do without the working distance of the short teles, a MicroNikkor 55/3.5 is only $126 from KEH in EX. https://www.keh.com/...us-lens-52.html

 

KEH sell the 18-55 VR II for $139 used in EX+ condition https://www.keh.com/...or-nikon-f.html

[ScottinPollock]

People complain about plastic mounts on cheap kit lenses, but in this case it probably saved your camera. Its a good lens, and as folks have already said can be had for little more than a hundred bucks (even new if you go grey market).

I would replace it and spend the extra money on the tripod.

[Steve M]

Sorry for the loss -- that really stinks.  Regarding the 18-55 VRII, you should be able to find that used for less than $150.  Don't let used lenses scare you, just make sure the seller knows what they're talking about.  Tamron or Sigma make a faster version of that kit lens, but they are more expensive.  I'm a flower shooter (about 90% of what I do), and I use a Tamron 90mm macro G2.  Once you use the macro lens, it's tough to go back to a close focus, kit style lens.  I have a Nikon 24-120 F4, and while it focuses reasonably close, the level of detail shot wide open on the macro lens -- smokes the kit lens at any F--stop.  If you are exclusively a tripod shooter, I see a lot of flower shots on the photo sites (500px, etc.) with people using the Nikon 55-200, and a close-up filter.  They get nice detail, and some magnification, too.  I shoot more artsy macro (sharp in the middle, blurring out to the edges) so a macro lens wide-open, to maybe F5.6, is all I ever need.

 

Good luck!

I really have no issues with used.   My best lens is used.   Today I will look at the lens you discussed above.   I am in no rush as I just pulled my old 18-55 off my D40x for now.  I can tell it is not as good as the one that came with the D7200.

[Wayben]

I agree.  KEH is a good place for used equipment.  They typically under grade their used items from what I've seen.  Sounds like a new tripod  needs to be on your shopping list, too.  There are lots of them out there, from really cheap to OMG expensive, and you usually get what you pay for.  

[Steve M]

The Tamron 17-50/2.8 in the sharper, non-VC version is ~$300 from B&H. A good sample works better than I thought on the D7200. I used mine extensively the week ending January 14. One week, one camera, one lens week ending January 14 2018 - Mini-Challenges, Member Contests, and Games - NikonForums.com

 

The first 47 in this gallery are shot with the Tamron on a D300.

17-50 - Gallery - NikonForums.com The rest are the photos from the January week.

 

It is far from a macro lens, it goes to a reproduction ratio of 1:4.5, but it does so with very little CA. The 18-55 will get you closer, but I am not sure how much.

 

A Tamron or Tokina short tele macro lens, or a used MicroNikkor 105 of some kind will get you much sharper flower shots than any zoom, but they aren't cheap. If you can do without the working distance of the short teles, a MicroNikkor 55/3.5 is only $126 from KEH in EX. https://www.keh.com/...us-lens-52.html

 

KEH sell the 18-55 VR II for $139 used in EX+ condition https://www.keh.com/...or-nikon-f.html

All nice pictures Peter.  That Tamron is interesting.  Thank you for the link to getting what I have used.   I have no issues with used and may end up just getting what I had.   Decisions Decisions.   

People complain about plastic mounts on cheap kit lenses, but in this case it probably saved your camera. Its a good lens, and as folks have already said can be had for little more than a hundred bucks (even new if you go grey market).

I would replace it and spend the extra money on the tripod.

Yes that is on the list.   The Tripod I have is what I got with a video camera I bought back in 1990.  I can't use it outside in the winter because the jell or grease it thickens.  

[ScottinPollock]

I am a big fan of Manfrotto for larger legs, and Benro for smaller ones. Both are stable, and very high quality without breaking your wallet.

I bought my first Benro ball head over a decade ago when they were new to the market and only offered a few heads. After using it for a while it was clear to me they would become a major player down the road. That head is still performing like new.

I am not a fan of the Manfrotto heads mostly because of their goofy quick release system. Everything I have is Arca-Swiss style. Good quality plates in many styles and sizes are available on eBay for cheap.

Carbon fiber is nice, but pricey. My smaller Benro is aluminum and small/light enough for travel, and I can always hang my bag from the center column for a little extra damping.

Oben makes some nice, lightweight ball heads as well for when you're not packing big glass (https://www.bhphotov...REaAgLJEALw_wcB).

I have a slightly smaller version of this on my smaller Benro legs, and the aforementioned, larger Benro KS1 on the Manfrotto.

[Merco_61]

An old Manfrotto 190 or 055 seems to be nearly indestructible if you want a good set of legs without breaking the bank. Sometimes old Gitzo Reporters or Mountaineers show up, they too are nearly impossible to break. Benro, Sirui and Cullmann all make ballheads that are good value for money and Arca-Swiss compatible. Stay away from Feisol and Induro heads, they don't last. Their legs are among the better, though.

 

If the goal is to buy two sets of tripods and more or less forget about how long they will last, I would look at Sachtler Speedlock 75 for the less heavy one and a Sachtler ENG2 for heavy duty. Cratoni make comparable models. They definitely fall in the OMG expensive bracket. To match the quality of the legs, RRS or Markins ballheads are a good choice.

[Steve M]

What does everyone think of this. In great shape

Bogen 3033 Tripod with a 3047 Head - $120

[Merco_61]

The Manfrotto 074 is a heavy beast but as long as the leg braces don't get in the way, they are good legs. The braced legs can make it difficult to set it up in uneven terrain as you can not play with the leg angles, only the leg extension. It was the studio version of the 075.

 

The 029 3-way head is a good, dependable unit, but the hexagonal plate takes some practise to get it to catch every time you mount the camera on the tripod.

 

One thing to consider is that the geared column makes it less versatile than a 055 as it can't be reversed for macro shooting. This means that you can't get lower than 70 cm or so if I remember correctly.

 

The price seems good, though.

[Steve M]

The Manfrotto 074 is a heavy beast but as long as the leg braces don't get in the way, they are good legs. The braced legs can make it difficult to set it up in uneven terrain as you can not play with the leg angles, only the leg extension. It was the studio version of the 075.
 
The 029 3-way head is a good, dependable unit, but the hexagonal plate takes some practise to get it to catch every time you mount the camera on the tripod.

To the point it is dangerous or will I know right away it is not secure? I just don’t want to walk away and have it fall when not in reach.
 
One thing to consider is that the geared column makes it less versatile than a 055 as it can't be reversed for macro shooting. This means that you can't get lower than 70 cm or so if I remember correctly.

I am not sure I understand.
 
The price seems good, though.

[Merco_61]

I can't remember ever not noticing when it didn't catch, so it isn't a dangerous flaw. It is more irritating than anything else.

 

 

On less heavy-duty tripods, the centre column can be removed and inserted upside down to get the camera lower by shooting between the tripod legs. This can be very useful when shooting macros outdoors. With a geared column, this isn't advisable as the teeth are easily damaged when removing the column. On most geared tripods, it isn't even possible as there is a key groove milled not exactly opposite the teeth. This design is made to discourage owners from trying to reverse it and causing damage over time. I don't remember whether the 074/075 use that design or not.

[Steve M]

I can't remember ever not noticing when it didn't catch, so it isn't a dangerous flaw. It is more irritating than anything else.
 
 
On less heavy-duty tripods, the centre column can be removed and inserted upside down to get the camera lower by shooting between the tripod legs. This can be very useful when shooting macros outdoors. With a geared column, this isn't advisable as the teeth are easily damaged when removing the column. On most geared tripods, it isn't even possible as there is a key groove milled not exactly opposite the teeth. This design is made to discourage owners from trying to reverse it and causing damage over time. I don't remember whether the 074/075 use that design or not.

Ok I understand now. Seems to be a good feature that I would use down the road.

Thank you so much for your help. I really appreciate that.