Nikon D7000: Kit or just body

[RampantAndroid]

Hi all,

I'm about to put an order on a D7000 over at Crutchfield (discover card cash back works over there to save me $150 or so) and was not sure if I wanted the kit lens or not.

I've already got the 18-200mm VR lens, but I'm planning to keep my D70 around as a cheap camera I can keep in the car, take skiing/boarding with me and such. Without a new lens, I'd end up using an old and worn (has dirt inside) 70mm lens and figured the kit lens - 18-105mm VR - might be a good, cheap lens to use with my D70. Does anyone have thoughts? Might there be a better tamron or sigma lens to buy separately?

 

[radhak]

Nikon kit lens are great, work fantastic, and difficult to turn down particularly when they are offered with the body at very small increase in price. And there's no point having two cameras if you have to keep swapping the lens from one to the other all the time. (I am discounting that other old lens you mentioned - too many negatives there).

But, these lens (18-200 and 18-105) have too much of an overlap. You might do better with a a complimentary range, like the 55-300 or 70-300 , for you'll start missing that higher range very soon.

Better still, you might check out the faster lenses in the 18-55 range. I have the Sigma 17-50 2.8, and absolutely love it, and I bought it at Craigslist for $200! New, it sells for around $450, but then, you will have a close-to-pro lens (the real deal would be the similar lens from Nikon, but that goes for around $900)

I checked out the Crutchfield site, and the price difference for the lens is $300. I think you could easily get a lens of your choice at around that price range.

Or of course, if the 'deal' is good enough, you could buy the kit and part out the lens for sale, to be replaced with another of your choice.

 

[Anubis]

if you want a 2nd lens to use with your old D70 then the kit makes sense, if not there is no need for it

however if you have the kit lens that came with the 70 id get that cleaned up and just use that, its a pretty great lens

 

[JohnnyRebel]

Nikon kit lens are great, work fantastic, and difficult to turn down particularly when they are offered with the body at very small increase in price. And there's no point having two cameras if you have to keep swapping the lens from one to the other all the time. (I am discounting that other old lens you mentioned - too many negatives there).

But, these lens (18-200 and 18-105) have too much of an overlap. You might do better with a a complimentary range, like the 55-300 or 70-300 , for you'll start missing that higher range very soon.

Better still, you might check out the faster lenses in the 18-55 range. I have the Sigma 17-50 2.8, and absolutely love it, and I bought it at Craigslist for $200! New, it sells for around $450, but then, you will have a close-to-pro lens (the real deal would be the similar lens from Nikon, but that goes for around $900)

I checked out the Crutchfield site, and the price difference for the lens is $300. I think you could easily get a lens of your choice at around that price range.

Or of course, if the 'deal' is good enough, you could buy the kit and part out the lens for sale, to be replaced with another of your choice.

If you are satisfied with the 18-200 for the D7000, then I would bring up the 35mm f/1.8 as an early must-have for around $200. And I agree with the suggestion to have the dirty lens cleaned (if it is the D70 kit lens: 18-70 f/3.5-4.5).

Of course, you could EBAY the 18-105 for enough to buy a 35mm f/1.8 and a SB-400 flash.

JR

EDIT: I was going to mention that Adorama sells a kit with the 55-300 for a bit cheaper than the 18-105, but they do not have any D7000's in stock, at all. You might look around for that kit elsewhere.

 

[Silenus]

It looks like you also have the 70-300 and the 35/1.8 yes? If so great kit. If you still have the 18-70 I'd keep that with the D70 and either stick with the 18-200 on the D7000....or replace it with the 18-105....or even better the 16-85 VR (this is my prefernce anyway. I've tried all and I like the 16-85 as a kit lens the best).

If you've got the 18-70 (which is a very good lens) having both the 18-200 and 18-105 just does seem too redundant. I'd keep one or the other. If not the 16-85 like I mentioned, I'd go with the 18-105 of the two.

 

[radhak]

the 35mm f/1.8 as an early must-have for around $200.

That 35mm 1.8 is my sweetheart lens. I believe it is even better than the venerable 50mm 1.8. It is a showcase of how much superior prime lenses are to zooms. Love it.

The D7000 seems to have gone out of stock all over; but then, I've bought all my cameras and lenses pre-owned, locally from CL, and never regretted any...

 

[RampantAndroid]

Yes - the 70mm is in fact the 18-70 f/3.5-4.5. How much does getting it cleaned cost? I considered opening it up myself, but stopped when I started to realize I was in over my head and was happy to get it back together.

The 70-300mm lens is f/4-5.6. A lens I rarely use. My intent with the D70 is a lens that gets me around easily. No lens changes on it, just one lens put on it, and the D70 kept around for the moments when I'm wishing I had a camera on me.

I've got the 35mm 1.8 and love it.

Thanks everyone!

 

[RampantAndroid]

As an update, it seems cleaning my lens is relatively simple: http://www.flickr.com/groups/nikon18-70dx/discuss/72157613927526978/

And I've found a D7000 in stock (I got the last one, it seems - but I did confirm D7000s seem to be shipping from the plant in Thailand again) but I got the body only (+SDHC cards, a tamrac case and an extra battery.) I'll clean the 18-70mm lens (it's a fine lens, just dirty) and keep that base/lens combo in the car for quick access, and then carry the D7000 around for the better stuff.

Thanks everyone, can't wait to get the body!