Camera discounts. Can they be genuine?

[Loose rivets]

It seems impossible that such huge differences could be real. The Nikon D700 from nearly $3000, to $1,799 and the famous 18 - 200 VR lens from over $700 in a well known local store, to $499 in a northern state. And that means no tax.

Sure, the camera has to have everything added...like a battery at $199, but I paid $1.99 for my Nikon replacement batts. That's not a mistake, One dollar 99 cents. Yep, the postage was nearly $7, but who cares? They have proved totally satisfactory over the last eighteen months.

BTW, does anyone know the difference between an EN-EL3 "e" and an "a". If they were interchangeable, that would save nearly $400 right away.

I need to make me mind up. The 18 - 200 would be it seems, wasted on the D700. and the sale, this one anyway, runs out tomorrow.



LOL, I took such care of the lens in my friendly Best Buy. Scarcely breathed near it, let alone on it. While I was doing my comparative shots round the huge new store, I noticed that the sales girl was tossing the 18 -200 from hand to hand while she was talking. Where do they find these people?

[Bushfiva]

Sure, the camera has to have everything added...like a battery at $199

That sort of dealer strips the box, then sells you all the parts separately. You're unlikely to get the camera at that price without getting the battery at the same time.

Srivvits, you seem to put time and effort into getting stuff from the most disreputable sources you can, then asking a bazillion questions on why it doesn't work/why it's different. If you know everything about a product, you can shop on price. If you know little on a product, you should shop by dealer reputation, methinks.

The 18 - 200 would be it seems, wasted on the D700

Don't buy the 18-200. It's a waste of the D700 body. Buy a non-DX lens.

Cameras that use the en-el3a can also use the en-el3e. Cameras that use the en-el3e cannot use the en-el3a: the latter cannot be fully inserted. The en-el3e conveys better battery info to the camera.

Happy piccy-taking.

[mixture]

Given that the D700 was only released in July 08, I would be very, very, weary of any deep discounting.

Regarding batteries, please see article 22671 on the Nikon Support Website "D-SLR camera battery, charger and AC adapter compatibility" or 18586 "D-SLR system charts".

[Loose rivets]

Well, I've spent a lifetime getting the best deals on kit, from the days of WWII leftovers. Doubt I'll change now.

Thanks for that information, it was just what I wanted to know.

The shop that has the D700, at the lowest price in the world, is a walk-in in NY. My son has been in there and it closes on Saturdays. They are a tad abrupt to deal with, but the Nikon warranty is sound. I'm told.

If I can buy that body at that price and use other batteries, then yes, it would make sense, but it seems that it's not an option on two counts. I'll phone now to see if they will sell the body alone.

[Loose rivets]

If you took the trouble to look, you would see that cameras have been discussed on this forum for many years.

I would have thought at your very modest post level, you might have waited some time before issuing orders.

[Out Of Trim]

Hi Loose rivets,

The Nikon D700 is a fine camera; however, some of those US shops that sells each part of the Boxes' contents are usually up to no good and are to be avoided.

I think you would be better off going to B & H or Best buy etc etc.

I'm sure you are aware that the D700 is a Full Frame FX model and compromises it's ability if you use DX Lenses with it!

I just wanted to be sure you know what you're getting there.

I personally opted for the similar but cheaper DX Nikon D300 - much better if you want to use extreme telephoto lenses as you get 1.5 crop view extra benefit of range.

A good site for thorough research is www.dpreview.com (http://www.dpreview.com)

Good Luck - OOT.

[Loose rivets]

Thanks for that. Having held, at their expense, for some time, I'm inclined to give up. However, B&H are circa a $1,000 more expensive!

I'm tending towards the 18 - 200 on a D300. It seems the lens in on offer today at $499 free delivery and no tax. That's a heck of a deal if it's real. So, what can happen?

I like to think that my bank would refund my money if the goods were not up to scratch. Even with modest savings, the Americans offer huge customer protection...it doesn't even get to the VISA department before something is done. By that I mean I don't have to moan at VISA, they do it for me.

Wondering what else could go wrong. The lens being in some way inferior? It's doubtful that Nikon would let rejects out on one of their best selling items...or anything really. But a substandard product would not be so easy to go to the bank about. Too cloudy. But I just can't see that happening.


Srivvits, you seem to put time and effort into getting stuff from the most disreputable sources you can

Totally mystified by this. And from one who then comes up with a helpful answer or two.


For me, a lot of the fun of buying toys is getting a good deal. I rode super-bikes until I was in my 50s and for five years they cost me nothing. Shooting hand-guns for ten years came off at a profit, and me airplane made a fortune. This all takes one onto a steep learning curve for a while, and the trouble is that modern stuff soaks up vast amounts of time because it's so computer orientated. To really understand a subject needs first and foremost an intense interest in the item. When the modern world offers so many disparate types of product, it can all get a bit tedious, and a quick helping hand is often all one needs. God help us, nowadays, even a fridge needs programming.

[mixture]

It's doubtful that Nikon would let rejects out on one of their best selling items...or anything really.

Nikon are generally very good at QA. However with suspiciously low pricing, you might be looking at a second hand or grey market kit.

[Loose rivets]

Grey market is hard to fathom. Certainly, there was one in Hatton garden that had super deals, then wouldn't answer the phone. Their web page lased months with no one in!

These people say One year US warranty.

When things are nearing half price, then it does ring alarms. The company who's name alludes to things audible, is by far and away cheaper than others on the "find things cheap" type of search pages.

I have to say, that this has piqued my curiosity about the whole marketing setup. One will probe more deeply.

[Bushfiva]

The shop that has the D700, at the lowest price in the world, is a walk-in in NY.Absolutely don't buy there. You will get ripped off. Camera forums over the years are full of tales of these NY shops. Re the warranty, "one year US warranty" can be another con: they may mean their warranty rather than the Nikon warranty, although grey imports aren't as much of an issue as they used to be: these shops make their money by pressuring you at point of sale into $200 for the battery, $100 for the lens filter you don't need, etc. In NY, B&H and similar are the places to consider.

If you're considering the D300, why not look at the D90? Are you sure you will use more than 5% of the features on the D300/D700?? Visually, no-one will be able to tell the difference between a shot on the D90 and D200.

The pixel count on the D300/D90/D700 is the same. With the D700 you'll make better use of non-DX glass and get a better noise figure especially at higher ISOs.

If you intend to walk around, you need a body and a do-it-all lens. If you drive around, you can get a spread of lenses with better performance/apertures. Walking, the D300/D700/D3 plus a couple of f/2.8 lenses is heavy. We're talking kilos here.

The D700 is an interim body: currently, Nikon has no "pro-am" full-sensor body. Expect the D700 to re-emerge as the D700X or suchlike within a year with a 25 MP sensor: this is where the market is going, if only to match the upcoming Canon releases.

(I'm a Nikon person, incidentally, but I'm not an evangelical Nikon person. If you're looking at Nikon because that's a name you know, then you should also have a look at Canon, Pentax and Sony at the very least, if your current lenses are particularly old.)

Totally mystified by this. And from one who then comes up with a helpful answer or two. Well, I've also been on your "I've got a bogus cracked corporate version of XP Pro. How legitimate is it?" thread, and it took several postings before we were aware exactly what you'd obtained. You tend not to put full info into the first post :-) Also, from postings alone, one has no idea of the other person's skill level. So I don't know whether you push every button on the camera, learn the menus, use the programmable flash options, do internal or external photo processing, leave the camera in the default sharpness mode for external processing, do external chromatic abberation reduction, or simply leave everything on the green point'n'shoot mode. I have to pick up the cues from what you post. If the former, buy what the heck you like, and if it's wrong, buy something else. If the latter, choose the lens first, and spend what's left on the (almost) cheapest body that fits it. :) I didn't intend to sound mean.

[Loose rivets]

Mmm...one is tending to spend far too much time outside a bottle of wine and inside JB these days. Rambling doesn't matter too much on JB, but here I suppose I should try to write the proverbial short letter. "If I had more time I'd write a short letter."

I've decided to just put a toe in the water and have sent off for the 18 - 200 VR II offering. I've paid for extra post, but still way ahead of the tax.

I have an Nikor 18 - 70 67mm at this time, and the comparison in the store was chalk and cheese. the new lens really did breath life into my D50

Yes, a more modest camera makes sense, cos I know that I'll at best, fall between the levels of usage you describe. If the lens seems okay, perhaps I'll risk a camera body...but yes, I'm very aware of being without a warranty.

I could go back to where I got my D50 from. Nikon refurbished. Couldn't see the tiniest mark on it, but that was rather at end of line time.

I'll post on the results, disaster or not.

[Bushfiva]

The Nikkor 18-70 DX is a pretty good lens. With the 18-200, you get substantial overlap. I would suggest, since the 18-200 is on its way, that you use them both on your D50 for a while, and see if the 18-200 matches the results of the 18-70 (which it should). If so, you can consider selling the 18-70. The 18-200 has a 7-blade rounded diaphragm, so bokeh is adequate to good, depending on who you listen to.

When considering image sharpness, use a tripod (and disable the VR): I was a little unhappy with 18-200 sharpness until I used the tripod. This prompted me to set the D300 to never go below 1/60s in programmed mode to compensate for my hands.

The VR lets you hand-hold at lower shutter speeds, however there's no magic going on; you've still basically got an f/3.5 to f/5.6 lens at max aperture, so you're not going to have much control over depth of field if that's your thing.

Since you now cover 18-200, perhaps wide angle is something you might want to consider: the 12-24 is a great lens, too. Again, max aperture isn't that hot.

My lenses are 12-24, 18-200, Sigma 30mm f/1.4, and an ancient 20-35mm. The latter is the sharpest, followed by the Sigma at mid-range apertures. The D50 is a great camera. If you have a local dealer, you might consider handling the D90 and D300. I have the D200 and D300, but if I were buying right now, I'd probably go for the D90 and save the difference for some big glass. In the future, I'll go back to full-frame, but not just yet. I may borrow a 17-55 f/2.8 DX to see if I need a winter lens.

When I had an F3, I had a bazillion lenses. I sold them all off other than the 20-35 after going to DX format. The only one I regret letting go of was my 80-200 f/2.8 which took great pics, but was a heavy beast.

Ken Rockwell believes high-ISO noise on the D90 is better than the D300, and just behind the D3. No info on the D700. Sharpness is the same across all Gen II sensors, including the D700. So again, the D90 would appear to be the sweet spot. Thom Hogan is also a good source of real-world info.

[green granite]

A good UK dealer price for D700 and lens as in this kit:
: Includes: D700 standard kit complete, 4gb Sandisk Ducati Extreme Compact Flash card (Fastest card on the market!) ENEL3E Spare battery, Nikon 24-120mmf3.5/5.6G AFS VR ED lens.

is around £2100 If you look at one of the Hong Kong "ebay power sellers" it's around £1675 for the same kit. Frankly if you can get it any cheaper I would be very very wary about it,

[Saab Dastard]

StaceyF

And stop posting camera-related questions in a "computer/internet issues & troubleshooting" forum

A digital camera is a computer peripheral!

SD

[Out Of Trim]

I also have the 18-70mm that came with my Nikon D70 - It's a pretty good walkaround lens, that I've had good results from. For my D300; I chose the 16-85mm VR over the 18-200mm VR.

I thinks it's a bit better optically, and I like the difference at the wide end; that extra 2mm seems quite a bit when seen through the viewfinder but, of course you lose some range. It seems a good combo so far, but I'm sure either would have been OK.

For longer range use, I have the 70-300mm ED and a Sigma 135-400mm available but I'm lusting after the Nikon 300mm F4 prime and the Sigma 10-20mm for wideangle.

Hmmm, lens lust is a terrible thing...! :)

[Loose rivets]

Yep, it was Ken Rockwell's statement that he often goes out with nothing but the 18 - 200 that made me think it might be a good do-it-all lens. I'll see, I've got the Rivetess looking at our losses over the last year, and wondering if a divorce wouldn't be cheaper.

I see the Sonic price on the D90 is about $750, but it uses the new Flavor of the EN-EL3 (e) That's tedious, cos I have several spare a's

[Loose rivets]

Well, not a good start. Paid for 3 day delivery, and ordered on Sunday. Late Tuesday I have just got an e saying phone in to confirm order. So why did I pay 38 bucks to have a 3 day thingie?

So, depending on the conversation tomorrow, I'll be canceling the order. I doubt they'll be doing anywhere near enough sucking up to just take two days out of the equation without justification for the silly postage. Still, I'm not surprised, it's all a bit of a trial with said outfit.

[Bushfiva]

phone in to confirm order

Oooh, that sounds upseller-ish, too. If they say you need filters, or pay more to get a non-gray market item, etc., you should walk.

[Loose rivets]

Ha! They say I need a whole new lens. A $300 more lens that I can have for a total of $530ish.

Why would I do that? I spent ages reading about the 18 - 200 VR. ?

Ken Rockwell only advises amateurs and what I really need is a Sigma that real photographers use.

At this time the order has been canceled.

[frostbite]

"the connection still eludes me"

Well, the connection from my camera goes straight to the USB port on the computer.











Am I feeding a troll?

[Old Grey]

Well, the connection from my camera goes straight to the USB port on the computer.

I've got a desk fan that does the same, but that doesn't mean that all desk fans are computer peripherals.

Just to add to the confusion, I have 2 DSLRs that are never connected directly to my PC because I use a card reader instead.

And yes, I too can detect the faint but distinct aroma of eau de troll.....

[Out Of Trim]

Well, surely a digital camera is a computer! It's got a processor, memory and my latest has a VGA 3 inch monitor.

Can't see a problem with discussing them here. :E

If you're not interested; don't read this thread..