2nd Hand/discounted kit

Status
Not open for further replies.

TheWanderer

Striker
Had my D40X for a few months now, and must say i'm happy as a pig in shit with the current photo's i've taken on recent trips to London, Knowlsey Safari park and a break up the Caravan at Hamsterly, but it's pretty obvious that the 18-55mm lense that i have got is not up to some of the nature type shots i really wished to take.

I'm starting this photography lark on a bit of a budget, and was wondering where you lot get your kit from, in particular 2nd hand or discounted kit. I'm not in the position to buy at the moment, but will be looking for a 55-200mm lense and a tripod in the future to get the shots i really want.

Is trying my luck on ebay the best option?
 


yeah ebay can be great for a bargain, got a few lenses off there myself.

also try rockys cameras for cheap second hand gear, had a bit bother with a lens i ordered from him but its sorted now, but he's well cheap.

try the Hama tripods on amazon if your just after something cheap and cheerfull, whiles't no where near as good as the more expensive ones like manfrotto they are decent and do a canny job, especially considering the price, i have the hama star63 and think it was about 15 quid, used it shitloads for over a year now without bother.
 
Would a 18-200 not be better? especially if doing nature shots which potentially at times require quick reaction and change of range. be a shame to miss a great shot cos you had to take 30 seconds to change the lens.
 
Would a 18-200 not be better? especially if doing nature shots which potentially at times require quick reaction and change of range. be a shame to miss a great shot cos you had to take 30 seconds to change the lens.

I had the Nikon 18-55 and 55-200, and replaced them with a Sigma 18-200.

Sort of regret it tbh.

The Sigma is convenient, but worse performing than the 2 individual lenses. Not dreadful by any means, just bad enough to annoy me.

The Nikon 18-200 is very good, but it's also very expensive too. It'd cost appx. £350 used, versus £100 for the 55-200. Think the Sigma (HSM OS model) would be appx £200-250 used, though they're harder to come by.
 
Would a 18-200 not be better? especially if doing nature shots which potentially at times require quick reaction and change of range. be a shame to miss a great shot cos you had to take 30 seconds to change the lens.

It would be but probably not on a budgie.

yeah ebay can be great for a bargain, got a few lenses off there myself.

also try rockys cameras for cheap second hand gear, had a bit bother with a lens i ordered from him but its sorted now, but he's well cheap.

try the Hama tripods on amazon if your just after something cheap and cheerfull, whiles't no where near as good as the more expensive ones like manfrotto they are decent and do a canny job, especially considering the price, i have the hama star63 and think it was about 15 quid, used it shitloads for over a year now without bother.

agree mate - I picked up this one which is a decent starter
 
I had the Nikon 18-55 and 55-200, and replaced them with a Sigma 18-200.

Sort of regret it tbh.

The Sigma is convenient, but worse performing than the 2 individual lenses. Not dreadful by any means, just bad enough to annoy me.

The Nikon 18-200 is very good, but it's also very expensive too. It'd cost appx. £350 used, versus £100 for the 55-200. Think the Sigma (HSM OS model) would be appx £200-250 used, though they're harder to come by.

I've got the Sigma 18-200 Canon fit. A very versatile lens and ideal for walkabout. A bit cack at longer focal lengths though.

Would a 18-200 not be better? especially if doing nature shots which potentially at times require quick reaction and change of range. be a shame to miss a great shot cos you had to take 30 seconds to change the lens.

I think you are unlikely to need anything as short as 18mm for nature. I would consider a c.70-200mm or 100-300mm with image stabilisation, say 100mm macro lens for spiders, dew drops, flowers and all that.
 
Would a 18-200 not be better? especially if doing nature shots which potentially at times require quick reaction and change of range. be a shame to miss a great shot cos you had to take 30 seconds to change the lens.

The thought did cross my mind until i started to price these up, and as i'm doing this on a bit of a budget i dont think i could justify the spend on a 18-200 at the moment. Maybe's if i progress from a starter to a slightly more advanced user then i could justify it, but not right now.
 
I've got the Sigma 18-200 Canon fit. A very versatile lens and ideal for walkabout. A bit cack at longer focal lengths though.

Mine is inconsistent. It's actually pretty good at 200, then randomly falls down at 150, then picks up again and falls off again. Not awful like and very versatile - all lenses are a trade-off I suppose.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top