Slickdeals.net

Slickdeals.net (http://slickdeals.net/forums/index.php)
-   Deal Talk (http://slickdeals.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=30)
-   -   Nikon Nikkor 55-200mm VR Zoom Lens Image Stabilization f/4-5.6G DX (Refurbished) $100 + Free Shipping (http://slickdeals.net/f/5983586-nikon-nikkor-55-200mm-vr-zoom-lens-image-stabilization-f-4-5-6g-dx-refurbished-100-free-shipping)

way2fast 04-23-2013 12:59 AM

Nikon Nikkor 55-200mm VR Zoom Lens Image Stabilization f/4-5.6G DX (Refurbished) $100 + Free Shipping
 
1 Attachment(s)
Great price for a refurb 55-200 VR.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI....0896144254

Enjoy :)

brisar 04-23-2013 12:59 AM

Nikon Nikkor 55-200mm VR Zoom Lens Image Stabilization f/4-5.6G DX (Refurbished) $100 + Free Shipping
 
1 Attachment(s)
Adorama.com and Adorama via eBay both have Nikon Nikkor 55-200mm VR Zoom Lens Image Stabilization f/4-5.6G DX (Refurbished 2166) on sale for $99.95. Shipping is free. Thanks way2fast




wikipost 04-23-2013 12:59 AM

This post can and should be edited by users like you :)
 
Adoram has the same price on its website.

http://www.adorama.com/NK55200VRR.html

ppt 04-23-2013 04:06 AM

Good price! Usually sells for $130-150.

mypobox 04-23-2013 04:16 AM

great cheap lens. this is a great price from a great retailer.

wfumike 04-23-2013 04:32 AM

should i bite on this or hold out for the slightly more expensive 55-300?

ppt 04-23-2013 04:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wfumike (Post 59020486)
should i bite on this or hold out for the slightly more expensive 55-300?

Get this one. You won't get much from 55-300mm (except extra reach) compared to this. I have 55-300 and tested a friend's 55-200. Both are almost the same, but 55-200 is light and easy to handle. Read some reviews and many agree 55-200 has great optics and fast auto focus.

mypobox 04-23-2013 04:55 AM

i own the 55-300, its a great lens if you keep it at f8 but it is huge and heavy. I picked up this 200m so i can enjoy much of the same focal length but a fraction of the weight and for $100, why not. thats a steal.

ppt 04-23-2013 05:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mypobox (Post 59020654)
i own the 55-300, its a great lens if you keep it at f8 but it is huge and heavy. I picked up this 200m so i can enjoy much of the same focal length but a fraction of the weight and for $100, why not. thats a steal.

Same here! If I don't like it on the long run, can sell it for a little loss.

blkonblk 04-23-2013 05:44 AM

Great deal, especially w/FS. Picked one up. I'm pondering the warranty, since I'm used to getting the full 5-year coverage on all my other new Nikon equipment, and this refurb lens only has 90-days. SquareTrade wants $16 for 1-year, $24 for 2.

I'd skip it if I thought this deal came around more often, but I haven't seen the 55-200 for $100 ship in a while. Hmm...

Tryin2GetBy 04-23-2013 05:46 AM

New dslr user here... bought a pentax k5 but need a better zoom to take pix of my kids playing indoor sports. Since I'm just a mom looking to get some good pix, can someone please tell me a good lens to get the pix I want without breaking the bank?
TIA!!

mlcraig58 04-23-2013 06:06 AM

In for one and rep'd...thanks!

mypobox 04-23-2013 06:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tryin2GetBy (Post 59021326)
New dslr user here... bought a pentax k5 but need a better zoom to take pix of my kids playing indoor sports. Since I'm just a mom looking to get some good pix, can someone please tell me a good lens to get the pix I want without breaking the bank?
TIA!!

the only correct answer is going to break the bank. indoor sports is about as bad as it gets. low light, fast action. u will want a 70-200 2.8f and that aint cheap. otherwise you will get low noise blurry shots or sharp with alot of noise. take your pick.

only way to do it cheap is a non is 2.8f like the tamaron 70-200mm for $700 on amazon. if you want IS thats $1500.

ps. im saving up for my 2.8f because im in the same boat.

ctuttle 04-23-2013 06:27 AM

Thank you, been looking for a telephoto for my Nikon

shnitz 04-23-2013 06:34 AM

This is a great lens. Small, light, and just like the 18-55mm, while you do get less features or build quality compared to the more expensive lenses, you still get very impressive image quality. Look at what people are achieving with this lens:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/nikon_55_200mm/
I took it because I wanted a lightweight setup for this weekend's MotoGP in Austin, and it does not disappoint, but that bright Texas sun would make any lens shine! Which brings up what you really lose compared to lenses like the 70-200mm f/2.8: you need to be in sunlight to be able to keep your shutter speed up.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Tryin2GetBy (Post 59021326)
New dslr user here... bought a pentax k5 but need a better zoom to take pix of my kids playing indoor sports. Since I'm just a mom looking to get some good pix, can someone please tell me a good lens to get the pix I want without breaking the bank?
TIA!!

Well, a Nikon lens thread isn't really the right place to ask for advice about your Pentax setup, but for indoor sports, you're going to have to pay, so breaking the bank is necessary. The reason is that you will need something that is a large aperture. For example, the Pentax 50-135mm f/2.8 or the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 are 2 stops faster than this Nikon lens, which means that you can shoot in 4 times lower light. Since indoor arenas are so dimly lit, this is your best bet, and that's why every professional sports photographer you ever see has a 70-200mm lens with him or her; it's the workhorse/go-to lens for nearly everything, and it keeps you the convenience of a zoom. After all, you paid $900 for a camera body that becomes obsolete in 3 years, so why are you objecting to paying the same amount for a lens that stays in your kit forever?

If you think that you can get by without a zoom, and/or you need a larger aperture, consider the 50mm f/1.4 for $350, or the Pentax 70mm or 77mm (the 77mm is wider aperture, letting you shoot in lower light, but is more expensive).

Tryin2GetBy 04-23-2013 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shnitz (Post 59022086)


Well, a Nikon lens thread isn't really the right place to ask for advice about your Pentax setup, but for indoor sports, you're going to have to pay, so breaking the bank is necessary. The reason is that you will need something that is a large aperture. For example, the Pentax 50-135mm f/2.8 or the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 are 2 stops faster than this Nikon lens, which means that you can shoot in 4 times lower light. Since indoor arenas are so dimly lit, this is your best bet, and that's why every professional sports photographer you ever see has a 70-200mm lens with him or her; it's the workhorse/go-to lens for nearly everything, and it keeps you the convenience of a zoom. After all, you paid $900 for a camera body that becomes obsolete in 3 years, so why are you objecting to paying the same amount for a lens that stays in your kit forever?

If you think that you can get by without a zoom, and/or you need a larger aperture, consider the 50mm f/1.4 for $350, or the Pentax 70mm or 77mm (the 77mm is wider aperture, letting you shoot in lower light, but is more expensive).

Thanks for the information. Sorry about the wrong thread. I finally took the plunge on a slick deal on the Pentax k5 with the 18-55 WR lens for $750. Not regretting it, but not looking forward to building a kit of lenses... notice my tag... stay at home mom pinching every penny we have. Splurged on the camera to get pix of my kids so I will have memories that last a lifetime. Don't want to regret not getting a cannon or nikon, so pentax is it. A little sick to the stomach reading that you said it will be obsolete in 3 years. If I splurge on a lens that is for Pentax, then it will be Pentax for life!

Parachute07 04-23-2013 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tryin2GetBy (Post 59021326)
New dslr user here... bought a pentax k5 but need a better zoom to take pix of my kids playing indoor sports. Since I'm just a mom looking to get some good pix, can someone please tell me a good lens to get the pix I want without breaking the bank?
TIA!!

Pentax was the wrong choice if money is a concern. The advantage of Pentax is that you can buy any lens made in the last thirtysomething years and it will work -- but most of the cheap lenses are older, manual-focus lenses. There just aren't cheap decent-quality lenses available for Pentax.....which is why I finally sold my Pentax K10D and accessories and bought a refurbished Canon T3i. I'm just an amateur, so the 50mm 1.8 and the 55-250mm lenses are perfect for my needs....and both of them together were less than what I was going to spend on any one similar lens for Pentax. It got frustrating, so I made the move. It's not that Pentax makes bad cameras -- on the contrary, my K10 was a lot more camera than I paid for I thought. But the glass was just too expensive for a hobby. I can't justify spending more than $700 on a lens unless I'm getting paid to use it. Just my two cents.

jmoy 04-23-2013 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shnitz (Post 59022086)
This is a great lens. Small, light, and just like the 18-55mm, while you do get less features or build quality compared to the more expensive lenses, you still get very impressive image quality. Look at what people are achieving with this lens:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/nikon_55_200mm/
I took it because I wanted a lightweight setup for this weekend's MotoGP in Austin, and it does not disappoint, but that bright Texas sun would make any lens shine! Which brings up what you really lose compared to lenses like the 70-200mm f/2.8: you need to be in sunlight to be able to keep your shutter speed up.

i dont disagree that those pictures are awesome but in general, Flickr "enhances" images that are uploaded to their website. without any post processing, one can see tat the same flickr image is different than the one that is on your computer.

gabe23111 04-23-2013 06:59 AM

I have the 18 - 200mm and the 35mm. I find myself rarely using the 18-200mm due to the extra weight over the 35mm. How does the lens in this op compare to the 18-200mm weight wise? And how do these lenses compare picturewise in the 100-200mm range?

I'm kind of a DSLR noob... Any help would be greatly appreciated.

I'm awfully tempted to pick up the lens in the op at this price. Just trying to figure out if it makes sense for me.

TIA

flyingvee 04-23-2013 07:02 AM

Good lens, good price. Have one - only catch, I dropped it once, and it literally fell apart. So - I'm watching these threads, waiting to get a replacement.

Just really sad about the build quality on the new DX lenses - otoh, name another Nikkor zoom for a c-note, right? :) (I paid around $400 for my 80-200 Nikkor, back in the day when that was serious money - otoh, it still works like it did the day I bought it.)

ruchiccio 04-23-2013 07:36 AM

Just bought one! Was waiting for such a deal, thanks OP.

k9homan 04-23-2013 07:40 AM

Thats why they give you that rope around the neck for the camera so you don't drop it. Also get a camera case with padding.

Quote:

Originally Posted by flyingvee (Post 59022654)
Good lens, good price. Have one - only catch, I dropped it once, and it literally fell apart. So - I'm watching these threads, waiting to get a replacement.

Just really sad about the build quality on the new DX lenses - otoh, name another Nikkor zoom for a c-note, right? :) (I paid around $400 for my 80-200 Nikkor, back in the day when that was serious money - otoh, it still works like it did the day I bought it.)


Neecy 04-23-2013 07:47 AM

Thank you! Have been wanting this lens, great price.

jenx56 04-23-2013 07:57 AM

In for one for myself, but have a question about the lens hood.

I bought this lens for my daughter at Christmas, and the lens hood fits very loose, too loose to use. So I bought the Nikon HB-34 tulip lens hood, and it also fits too loose to use. Found some comments on Amazon that matched my experience. Anybody have any experience with this? Or a quick fix to tighten the fit, perhaps with a bit of black tape on the lens to tighten the fit? Thanks for the help!

Patj 04-23-2013 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by way2fast (Post 59019302)
Great price for a refurb 55-200 VR.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI....0896144254

Enjoy :)

Hmm... will the VR work with an earlier (D70s) Nikon?
Answer:
http://photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00OUHf

kalyanij 04-23-2013 08:23 AM

Will this work with my new Nikon D3100? Thanks in advance

Troublestylist 04-23-2013 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wfumike (Post 59020486)
should i bite on this or hold out for the slightly more expensive 55-300?

Same as the others said...get this one. The extra benefit of 300mm vs 200mm is surprisingly little for most uses. You can easily crop in, and often times the extra framing area helps get the shot you want anyways.

jkyuen 04-23-2013 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kalyanij (Post 59024564)
Will this work with my new Nikon D3100? Thanks in advance

yup works with your D3100

tgi_hot 04-23-2013 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wfumike (Post 59020486)
should i bite on this or hold out for the slightly more expensive 55-300?

where did you find 55-300? I don't see it under the same seller in eBay.

kmoff77 04-23-2013 08:32 AM

Great deal! I paid about $125-130 for mine

Devil_Z 04-23-2013 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kalyanij (Post 59024564)
Will this work with my new Nikon D3100? Thanks in advance

This will be a great deal for people who bought the Refurb D3100 from Adorama Ebay. It takes some very nice portraits.

brandondowling 04-23-2013 08:36 AM

For a DSLR newbie who's spent most of fist time with P&S...would this lens be worth it?

I just jumped on the D3100 deal yesterday and was looking for a zoom lens and and a prime lens (Maybe a 50mm f /1.8)...

It looks like a huge benefit over the 18-55mm kit lens at the cost of less light. Would it be worth the purchase for someone mostly photographing landscapes/buildings?

ruchiccio 04-23-2013 08:38 AM

Anybody know of a decent camera case that can support a D3100 with this lens attached to it? I have a case that works only for my 18-55 lens, but not something bigger.

Requisite 04-23-2013 08:38 AM

Great lens...got it for $120 a few weeks ago.

sunk318 04-23-2013 08:44 AM

Great lens indeed

I got mine a month ago for $110 and worth every penny.

I just went photoshoot with it yesterday and all the pictures came out super sharp.

shnitz 04-23-2013 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tryin2GetBy (Post 59022232)
Thanks for the information. Sorry about the wrong thread. I finally took the plunge on a slick deal on the Pentax k5 with the 18-55 WR lens for $750. Not regretting it, but not looking forward to building a kit of lenses... notice my tag... stay at home mom pinching every penny we have. Splurged on the camera to get pix of my kids so I will have memories that last a lifetime. Don't want to regret not getting a cannon or nikon, so pentax is it. A little sick to the stomach reading that you said it will be obsolete in 3 years. If I splurge on a lens that is for Pentax, then it will be Pentax for life!

That's the nature of cameras. They are tied to computers/semiconductors, so they become obsolete as fast as laptops and cell phones. They still take great photos, it's just that there is newer and better. For example, I got a backup D3100, which is Nikon's lowest end camera, to go with my D200, which was Nikon's 2nd best camera from about 7 years ago. This new camera is amazing, and I hardly ever take my D200 out anymore. There are many features I miss on the D3100, but I've learned to work around them, because the image quality is so good.

You don't have to regret going Pentax; you didn't make the wrong choice. Your lens options would be just as expensive with Nikon or Canon. Stick with Pentax, because you have an amazing camera. This is the cheapest pro indoor sports zoom, and it's the same price for all 3 companies:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/pro...EX_DG.html
And if you want sticker shock, go look up the price of the Canon or Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses. You'd be looking at $2,500. Again, grab yourself the 50mm f/1.4 or the 70mm or 77mm if you don't mind not having zoom.

Also, buy yourself the new version of Lightroom when it comes out, and shoot in RAW. Lightroom is cheaper than any lens that you'd buy, but most photographers ignore the 2nd half of photography, which is image editing. Even if it just had the organizational features, it would be worth the price.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parachute07 (Post 59022366)
Pentax was the wrong choice if money is a concern. The advantage of Pentax is that you can buy any lens made in the last thirtysomething years and it will work -- but most of the cheap lenses are older, manual-focus lenses. There just aren't cheap decent-quality lenses available for Pentax.....which is why I finally sold my Pentax K10D and accessories and bought a refurbished Canon T3i. I'm just an amateur, so the 50mm 1.8 and the 55-250mm lenses are perfect for my needs....and both of them together were less than what I was going to spend on any one similar lens for Pentax. It got frustrating, so I made the move. It's not that Pentax makes bad cameras -- on the contrary, my K10 was a lot more camera than I paid for I thought. But the glass was just too expensive for a hobby. I can't justify spending more than $700 on a lens unless I'm getting paid to use it. Just my two cents.

I disagree completely. Pentax is not more expensive than Canon. You have Canon's cheapest introductory level lenses, which is why you think they are inexpensive. Try replacing that 50mm f/1.8 with the f/1.4, or god forbid the f/1.2, and then come back and try to make that argument. Same thing with the 55-250mm: step up to the 70-200mm f/2.8L, or even "just" the 70-300mm L lens. Jumping ship is almost never a good idea; jumping ship just to get Canon's bottom of the barrel glass was absolutely a mistake. You should have gotten yourself better glass, and you would have come out ahead.

Which comparable lens are you talking about? Because the Pentax 55-300mm is as comparable to the 70-300mm as it is to the 55-250mm, it slots somewhere between the two. Plus, don't compare new prices to refurbished. Apples to apples, please.


Quote:

Originally Posted by gabe23111 (Post 59022606)
I have the 18 - 200mm and the 35mm. I find myself rarely using the 18-200mm due to the extra weight over the 35mm. How does the lens in this op compare to the 18-200mm weight wise? And how do these lenses compare picturewise in the 100-200mm range?

I'm kind of a DSLR noob... Any help would be greatly appreciated.

I'm awfully tempted to pick up the lens in the op at this price. Just trying to figure out if it makes sense for me.

TIA

The 55-200mm VR is superior to the 18-200mm optically. The 18-200mm just gives you convenience, not image quality. I bought into the hype and got myself the Nikon 18-200mm, but sold it after I found myself using the 55-200mm VR for my telephoto shots. You do lose out on the ultrafast SWM focusing, and the 18-200mm has a better VR system, but the 55-200mm VR is still decently quick. It was fast enough for me at the MotoGP.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jenx56 (Post 59024012)
In for one for myself, but have a question about the lens hood.

I bought this lens for my daughter at Christmas, and the lens hood fits very loose, too loose to use. So I bought the Nikon HB-34 tulip lens hood, and it also fits too loose to use. Found some comments on Amazon that matched my experience. Anybody have any experience with this? Or a quick fix to tighten the fit, perhaps with a bit of black tape on the lens to tighten the fit? Thanks for the help!

You have to line up the markings on the hood and the lens, and then rotate. Make sure to rotate past the little indentation, you will feel a little click. You probably aren't clicking it into place.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patj (Post 59024144)
Hmm... will the VR work with an earlier (D70s) Nikon?

Yes, it will, but you will gain leaps and bounds by also considering deals like the current D3100 for $300 from Adorama. Will spank your D70 in every way imaginable.

kaolan 04-23-2013 08:48 AM

Adoram has the same price on its website.

http://www.adorama.com/NK55200VRR.html

Follywood 04-23-2013 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sun5467692 (Post 59025050)
Great lens indeed

I got mine a month ago for $110 and worth every penny.

I just went photoshoot with it yesterday and all the pictures came out super sharp.

im a newbie, this lense would replace the 18-55mm?

GottWhat 04-23-2013 08:50 AM

Great deal. I would be all over it if I didn't already own one!

lev280 04-23-2013 08:51 AM

Yesterday, I spent $299 on the D-3100. Today, I am purchasing this lens (definitely good price for this lens). And now, I just need a flash for indoor photography. Hopefully, there will be a deal on it tomorrow?

broadleaf35 04-23-2013 08:57 AM

Bought this lens a few weeks ago refurbished for $99 plus shipping for my D7000. Great compliment to the 18-55 DX VR lens, just a tad heavier, and you'll enjoy the "reach" you get with this lens. I've been able to crop decent to excellent photos of an eagle's nest nearby. I took it on a whale watching trip here in Alaska the other day and noticed that the handful of other people with Nikon cameras had 55-200's as well, so its definitely a popular lens. I also carry my three lenses (have the 35mm 1.8 prime as well) and camera in a lowepro slingshot 102 camera bag for hiking and, while its a snug fit in the bag pockets, its no problem at all to carry. If you use it good conditions as intended (daylight outdoors, good light indoors, tripod and/or flash for semi low light), you should get great results. Try it. If you don't like it, sell it for the same cost back on ebay.

Prince01 04-23-2013 08:58 AM

should I go for this or 35mm one? i have 18-55mm thought of upgrading but people are asking to get the 35mm instead of 18-200

cnewsgrp 04-23-2013 09:01 AM

Damn SD. Had to buy this. Good deal

broadleaf35 04-23-2013 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince01 (Post 59025374)
should I go for this or 35mm one? i have 18-55mm thought of upgrading but people are asking to get the 35mm instead of 18-200

It depends on what you have in mind to shoot. In my experience, the 35mm is a great indoor/low light lens for photographing my kids while I'm using the 55-200 primarily for wildlife. There's a myriad of opinions on both lens if you goggle for reviews, and they'll likely help you make a decision.

lev280 04-23-2013 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cnewsgrp (Post 59025428)
Damn SD. Had to buy this. Good deal

The only solution to this is to block SD and other deal sites from your browser; remove the SD app from your phone/tablet, etc. Life is wonderful. However, after several of these 'blackout 'attempts, I have to admit that I have relapsed.

ppt 04-23-2013 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brandondowling (Post 59024846)
For a DSLR newbie who's spent most of fist time with P&S...would this lens be worth it?

I just jumped on the D3100 deal yesterday and was looking for a zoom lens and and a prime lens (Maybe a 50mm f /1.8)...

It looks like a huge benefit over the 18-55mm kit lens at the cost of less light. Would it be worth the purchase for someone mostly photographing landscapes/buildings?

Before deciding on a prime, experiment which focal length works for you better. Set your 18-55 to 35mm and take bunch of shots. Then set it to 50mm and do the same. Buy the focal length that works for you most (or buy both :D).

I got 35mm 1.8g for tight indoor photos because 50mm is too long on cropped frame.

ppt 04-23-2013 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Follywood (Post 59025172)
im a newbie, this lense would replace the 18-55mm?

No. They complement each other.

18-55mm: wide angle to short telephoto. general purpose lens for everyday shooting.

55-200mm: medium telephoto zoom. For portraits and enlarging distant subjects.

Follywood 04-23-2013 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ppt (Post 59025862)
No. They work side-by-side.

18-55mm: wide angle to short. general purpose lens for everyday shooting.

55-200mm: medium telephoto zoom. For portraits and enlarging distant subjects.

thanks appreciate the info. I just got one for my d3100.

Gelladuga69 04-23-2013 09:19 AM

Oh hell yes. I've been waiting for a deal like this. It's not a 55-300, but I got this for $85 after using eBay bucks. What a steal. Thanks, OP!

Now just need the 10/12-24 to drop like this. :drool::P

vadnart 04-23-2013 09:19 AM

has anyone paired this w/ D7000 ? I'm looking for convenient telephoto walk-around lens but seems D7000 (at least mine) doesn't work well with cheaper lens ,i.e. auto-focus and metering from time to time.

thx!

EladR 04-23-2013 09:21 AM

will this fit my D5100 Nikon?

Gelladuga69 04-23-2013 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EladR (Post 59025956)
will this fit my D5100 Nikon?

Yes. This is a DX lens.

ppt 04-23-2013 09:23 AM

delete.

EladR 04-23-2013 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gelladuga69 (Post 59026022)
Yes. This is a DX lens.


Thank you for the fast respond.. IN for one!!! WOOOHOOO

jcis 04-23-2013 09:28 AM

got one for my D3100! can't wait to put my hands on it

thank you guys, I was about to ask the same questions, but forced my self to read the whole tread and found my answers!

lilrabbit129 04-23-2013 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Follywood (Post 59025172)
im a newbie, this lense would replace the 18-55mm?

No, this would be a good compliment to the 18-55. The 18-55 is for your near to mid shots, this would be for your mid to far shots ( zooming).

Sleepy1116 04-23-2013 09:42 AM

Can anyone tell me will this one fit Nikon J1/V1 without adapter?

starlure 04-23-2013 09:44 AM

will this work good with d90? hard to resist on it...

Tib02 04-23-2013 09:45 AM

By adding http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI....0904283930
to your cart, you will get an additional $20 off

hbcobra 04-23-2013 09:48 AM

Damn, I bought this same refurbished lens less than a month ago from Adorama for $134.95.

Does anyone know if Adorama has price protection or anything like that?

fyu 04-23-2013 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tib02 (Post 59026580)
By adding http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI....0904283930
to your cart, you will get an additional $20 off

wow. that's a smoking deal.
$79.90

kcortez101 04-23-2013 09:54 AM

Perfect timing. REPPEDPED

ashish20000 04-23-2013 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tib02 (Post 59026580)
By adding http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI....0904283930
to your cart, you will get an additional $20 off

Was on fence but after seeing your link, pulled the trigger. What a deal!!

cnewsgrp 04-23-2013 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hbcobra (Post 59026660)
Damn, I bought this same refurbished lens less than a month ago from Adorama for $134.95.

Does anyone know if Adorama has price protection or anything like that?

They sent me a $15 giftcard after D5100 dropped within 15 days. Call them and talk nicely.

gruberej 04-23-2013 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tib02 (Post 59026580)
By adding http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI....0904283930
to your cart, you will get an additional $20 off

Did the above and my total was 79.90 shipped...awesome. Thanks!

Princeman 04-23-2013 09:59 AM

I have a Tamron AF 18-250mm F/3.5-6.3 Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) Macro Zoom Lens with Built In Motor for Nikon DSLR with a D70. Would I have a need for this lens too just for VR? Been waiting for a D5100 or D90 body super deal.

dsmith518 04-23-2013 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tib02 (Post 59026580)
By adding http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI....0904283930
to your cart, you will get an additional $20 off

Awesome! Thanks! Reps for you and OP!!

crocodile 04-23-2013 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gruberej (Post 59026942)
Did the above and my total was 79.90 shipped...awesome. Thanks!

Same here, was in 2 minds before this dropped another $20, so jumped the fence.

Fitzbane 04-23-2013 10:05 AM

Wow. like everyone else..on the fence, but then saw another $20 off and pulled the trigger. $380 in 2 days, slickdeals does it again.

jenx56 04-23-2013 10:07 AM

Quote:

You have to line up the markings on the hood and the lens, and then rotate. Make sure to rotate past the little indentation, you will feel a little click. You probably aren't clicking it into place.
Thank you! Can't believe I didn't figure that out ...

opheron 04-23-2013 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tib02 (Post 59026580)
By adding http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI....0904283930
to your cart, you will get an additional $20 off

Worked and got the lens + 7-year warranty for $85 including tax, that was a great deal!

kaolan 04-23-2013 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tib02 (Post 59026580)
By adding http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI....0904283930
to your cart, you will get an additional $20 off

works. repped.

PooMBA 04-23-2013 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wfumike (Post 59020486)
should i bite on this or hold out for the slightly more expensive 55-300?

Bite at your own peril, the outer case is very hard.

ppt 04-23-2013 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tib02 (Post 59026580)
By adding http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI....0904283930
to your cart, you will get an additional $20 off

I see $99.95.

Am I doing something wrong?

*Edit* Dead

josepaz2 04-23-2013 10:14 AM

warranty sold out... back up to $100

radu 04-23-2013 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaolan (Post 59027308)
works. repped.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tib02 (Post 59026580)
By adding http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI....0904283930
to your cart, you will get an additional $20 off

Price shows up as $79.90. Thanks a bunch.
But can anyone explain me this warranty concept in brief? Will i be able to get this warranty applied on this lens (as refurbished)? Thanks again. Will buy based on your replies.

JennaLotres80 04-23-2013 10:19 AM

Great deal for that lens, thank you!

DiGi2k 04-23-2013 10:21 AM

Great deal! I was on the fence... luckly, I jumped before the $20 warranty thing went OOS... that pushed me!

dkslblackjack 04-23-2013 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by josepaz2 (Post 59027396)
warranty sold out... back up to $100

Yea had it in my cart and it updated. D-bags. Its a document printed out of a printer.

ppt 04-23-2013 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkslblackjack (Post 59027572)
Yea had it in my cart and it updated. D-bags. Its a document printed out of a printer.

They corrected their mistake, I guess. Now only $4 off from the total. (not $40)!

dkslblackjack 04-23-2013 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ppt (Post 59027674)
They corrected their mistake, I guess. Now only $4 off from the total. (not $40)!

My Previous comment still stands.

sunk318 04-23-2013 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Follywood (Post 59025172)
im a newbie, this lense would replace the 18-55mm?

Definitely not, you would want to carry both lenses to get the range of 18-200

carlosv03 04-23-2013 10:32 AM

That 20 off is oos.

flyingvee 04-23-2013 10:34 AM

80 bucks woulda been pretty cool. I can't replicate that. Gone, or hints?

jkyuen 04-23-2013 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Follywood (Post 59025172)
im a newbie, this lense would replace the 18-55mm?

if you want a replacement with a better zoom a 18-105mm would be a good "walk around" lens like this one http://www.adorama.com/NK18105VRR.html i'm hoping maybe this week that one would go on sale too =D

kaolan 04-23-2013 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flyingvee (Post 59027904)
80 bucks woulda been pretty cool. I can't replicate that. Gone, or hints?

it's gone. now it only takes $4 off the bundle. i guess it was a price mistake ($40off).

flyingvee 04-23-2013 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaolan (Post 59027950)
it's gone. now it only takes $4 off the bundle. i guess it was a price mistake ($40off).

Thanks - that's' all I'm seeing now. :shake:

Congrats to any and all who got in on that one.

Ram|bunc|tious 04-23-2013 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ppt (Post 59020622)
Get this one. You won't get much from 55-300mm (except extra reach) compared to this. I have 55-300 and tested a friend's 55-200. Both are almost the same, but 55-200 is light and easy to handle. Read some reviews and many agree 55-200 has great optics and fast auto focus.

I've had both - upgraded to the 55-300 for the extra reach. Most notably for my kid's soccer game, I had to put down the 55-200 when action was on the far side of the field, with the 55-300, I'm right back on top of it.

Sold the 55-200 for $100 on CL so this is a great price imho.

Where's the SD for the Nikon 18-300mm VR ??? :drool2:

AZVike 04-23-2013 11:10 AM

Cool. Takes care of the Mother's day gift. Didn't get in on the package, but I had some Ebay bucks so $85 shipped. Thanks OP!.

Gelladuga69 04-23-2013 11:25 AM

Damn, I saw that warranty thing after I purchased. Didn't think too much, since I didn't think it would take another $20 off my order. Would've gotten the lens for $65 shipped after my eBay bucks. Now that would've been a super slick deal.

Chirs 04-23-2013 11:29 AM

Dead, now it's $135.

wtiger91 04-23-2013 11:33 AM

darn it, is the deal dead? I see the price as $134//

cnganesh 04-23-2013 11:33 AM

Looks like the price went up to $134 (both sites)

snlguy 04-23-2013 11:35 AM

This is insane

saarifam678 04-23-2013 11:47 AM

Im looking for a lens to use with my Nikon D60, to shoot pictures of my son while he plays football games and baseball games. Also a lens for scenery, will this lens work for those?

jpmxch 04-23-2013 12:05 PM

Got one with the warranty. Had to pay tax since I live in NY. Still awesome deal

iyg 04-23-2013 12:14 PM

Can this one use with D3100? Just for reference so I can buy it in the next deal.

Gelladuga69 04-23-2013 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iyg (Post 59030560)
Can this one use with D3100? Just for reference so I can buy it in the next deal.

Yes. This is a DX lens.

smoka 04-23-2013 01:31 PM

Glad I got in on one before it went OOS.. This will go great with the Refurbished Nikon D5100 I just got for $429. So Nikon D5100 + 18-55 & 55-200 lenses for $529.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tib02 (Post 59026580)
By adding http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI....0904283930
to your cart, you will get an additional $20 off

Doh, how did I miss this!! Would've made the deal even sweeter with a $20 savings and a 7-year warranty. Oh well :(

Slick2Steal 04-23-2013 02:26 PM

got 1 earlier to add to my collection... thanks and repped.

pinkertonfloyd 04-23-2013 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gelladuga69 (Post 59031530)
Yes. This is a DX lens.

And AF-S... (internal motor) needed on all of the newer DX cameras... (d3xxx, d5xxx, d7xxx, d40, D80)
(there are some DX lenses that weren't AF-S).

Gelladuga69 04-24-2013 06:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pinkertonfloyd (Post 59037960)
And AF-S... (internal motor) needed on all of the newer DX cameras... (d3xxx, d5xxx, d7xxx, d40, D80)
(there are some DX lenses that weren't AF-S).

AF-S needed to work with D3100? No. Needed for Auto Focus on DX body? Yes.

cnewsgrp 04-24-2013 01:00 PM

Wow. That was fast. Delivered today

Gelladuga69 04-25-2013 03:26 PM

Got mine today. Looks to be in perfect order.

ppt 04-25-2013 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gelladuga69 (Post 59081364)
Got mine today. Looks to be in perfect order.

Same here. Looks brand new, with original caps. What's missing is the box. Works flawlessly. It is lighter and fast AF compared to my 55-200.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:00 AM.


1999-2014