Request views on Nikon 18-200 lens

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by MaryL, Dec 7, 2008.

  1. MaryL

    MaryL Guest

    I have a Nikon D80 with 18-135 kit lens (18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX
    Zoom-Nikkor ) and also a 70-300 lens (70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR
    Zoom-Nikkor). I am planning a trip to Greece in the spring, and a great
    deal of walking will be involved. The 70-300 lens is rather heavy, and it
    really would not be practical for me to carry two lenses and try to
    constantly change them since I will be traveling with a group. So, I am
    interested in a "walk-around" lens that will be more practical, be good
    quality but not "break the bank" quality. Have any of you used the 18-200mm
    f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor lens, especially in combination
    with the D80? If so, I would appreciate your thoughts about this lens for
    the purpose I described. I am an amateur photog, still in the process of
    learning the features of this camera. I do also have a much smaller Nikon
    camera (P80, not a DSLR), but I think I would be very disappointed if I had
    that one and missed a lot of shots that I could have gotten with the D80.
    Incidentally, I have gone to sites like dpreview, but I am interested in
    also hearing personal responses from users.

    Thanks,
    MaryL
     
    MaryL, Dec 7, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. MaryL

    N Guest

    "MaryL" <-OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote in message
    news:493b36d7$0$5493$...
    >I have a Nikon D80 with 18-135 kit lens (18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX
    >Zoom-Nikkor ) and also a 70-300 lens (70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR
    >Zoom-Nikkor). I am planning a trip to Greece in the spring, and a great
    >deal of walking will be involved. The 70-300 lens is rather heavy, and it
    >really would not be practical for me to carry two lenses and try to
    >constantly change them since I will be traveling with a group. So, I am
    >interested in a "walk-around" lens that will be more practical, be good
    >quality but not "break the bank" quality. Have any of you used the
    >18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor lens, especially in
    >combination with the D80? If so, I would appreciate your thoughts about
    >this lens for the purpose I described. I am an amateur photog, still in
    >the process of learning the features of this camera. I do also have a much
    >smaller Nikon camera (P80, not a DSLR), but I think I would be very
    >disappointed if I had that one and missed a lot of shots that I could have
    >gotten with the D80. Incidentally, I have gone to sites like dpreview, but
    >I am interested in also hearing personal responses from users.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > MaryL
    >


    http://www.flickr.com/groups/nikon_18-200_vr/

    It's a fabulous walk around lens.
     
    N, Dec 7, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. MaryL wrote:
    > I have a Nikon D80 with 18-135 kit lens (18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S
    > DX Zoom-Nikkor ) and also a 70-300 lens (70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S
    > VR Zoom-Nikkor). I am planning a trip to Greece in the spring, and a
    > great deal of walking will be involved. The 70-300 lens is rather
    > heavy, and it really would not be practical for me to carry two lenses
    > and try to constantly change them since I will be traveling with a
    > group. So, I am interested in a "walk-around" lens that will be more
    > practical, be good quality but not "break the bank" quality. Have any
    > of you used the 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor lens,
    > especially in combination with the D80? If so, I would appreciate your
    > thoughts about this lens for the purpose I described. I am an amateur
    > photog, still in the process of learning the features of this camera. I
    > do also have a much smaller Nikon camera (P80, not a DSLR), but I think
    > I would be very disappointed if I had that one and missed a lot of shots
    > that I could have gotten with the D80. Incidentally, I have gone to
    > sites like dpreview, but I am interested in also hearing personal
    > responses from users.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > MaryL
    >

    I have the 18-200 with a D300 and love it. I bought the pair for
    reasons similar to yours. I got tired carrying around 3 lenses. I have
    used it with my D50 and it works fine so I would expect it would be fine
    with the D80. Do reread the reviews and make sure you can live with the
    faults. Expect quality similar to the 18-135, if you can live with that
    then it should be fine. I must say, I find DSLR's a bit bulky to travel
    with. Test the P80 in situations you expect to find on your trip and
    evaluate if it would suffice. It would also be less traumatic if you
    happened to "lose" it along the way.

    Enjoy your trip,
    Clair
     
    Clair Johnston, Dec 7, 2008
    #3
  4. MaryL wrote:
    > I have a Nikon D80 with 18-135 kit lens (18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF
    > AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor ) and also a 70-300 lens (70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G
    > IF-ED AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor). I am planning a trip to Greece in the
    > spring, and a great deal of walking will be involved. The 70-300
    > lens is rather heavy, and it really would not be practical for me to
    > carry two lenses and try to constantly change them since I will be
    > traveling with a group. So, I am interested in a "walk-around" lens
    > that will be more practical, be good quality but not "break the bank"
    > quality. Have any of you used the 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR
    > DX Zoom-Nikkor lens, especially in combination with the D80? If so,
    > I would appreciate your thoughts about this lens for the purpose I
    > described. I am an amateur photog, still in the process of learning
    > the features of this camera. I do also have a much smaller Nikon
    > camera (P80, not a DSLR), but I think I would be very disappointed if
    > I had that one and missed a lot of shots that I could have gotten
    > with the D80. Incidentally, I have gone to sites like dpreview, but I
    > am interested in also hearing personal responses from users.
    > Thanks,
    > MaryL


    My wife has the 18-200 VR and has been very pleased with it. I happen to
    have the 16-85 VR and 70-300 VR, but had the 18-200 VR been readily
    available when I got my first DSLR, I might well have ended up with it
    instead. Performance is fine, and the lack of lens changing is a bonus.
    It's not as heavy a lens as I expected.

    We also carry a very compact Panasonic with 28-280mm eq. zoom which can be
    used for videos or as a "handbag" camera - a lot smaller than the Nikon
    P80.
    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonictz3/

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Dec 7, 2008
    #4
  5. MaryL

    PDM Guest

    "MaryL" <-OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote in message
    news:493b36d7$0$5493$...
    >I have a Nikon D80 with 18-135 kit lens (18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX
    >Zoom-Nikkor ) and also a 70-300 lens (70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR
    >Zoom-Nikkor). I am planning a trip to Greece in the spring, and a great
    >deal of walking will be involved. The 70-300 lens is rather heavy, and it
    >really would not be practical for me to carry two lenses and try to
    >constantly change them since I will be traveling with a group. So, I am
    >interested in a "walk-around" lens that will be more practical, be good
    >quality but not "break the bank" quality. Have any of you used the
    >18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor lens, especially in
    >combination with the D80? If so, I would appreciate your thoughts about
    >this lens for the purpose I described. I am an amateur photog, still in
    >the process of learning the features of this camera. I do also have a much
    >smaller Nikon camera (P80, not a DSLR), but I think I would be very
    >disappointed if I had that one and missed a lot of shots that I could have
    >gotten with the D80. Incidentally, I have gone to sites like dpreview, but
    >I am interested in also hearing personal responses from users.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > MaryL
    >

    Got one, use it as my standard, go anywhere, lens. Quality may not be as
    good as some of Nikon's lenses, but it's swings and roundabouts; it's good
    enough. Only real problem with this lens is that it has bad boke. That is
    the highlights in out of focus backgrounds have hard edges.

    PDM
     
    PDM, Dec 7, 2008
    #5
  6. MaryL

    Sheila Guest

    MaryL wrote:
    > I have a Nikon D80 with 18-135 kit lens (18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S
    > DX Zoom-Nikkor ) and also a 70-300 lens (70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S
    > VR Zoom-Nikkor). I am planning a trip to Greece in the spring, and a
    > great deal of walking will be involved. The 70-300 lens is rather
    > heavy, and it really would not be practical for me to carry two lenses
    > and try to constantly change them since I will be traveling with a
    > group. So, I am interested in a "walk-around" lens that will be more
    > practical, be good quality but not "break the bank" quality. Have any
    > of you used the 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor lens,
    > especially in combination with the D80? If so, I would appreciate your
    > thoughts about this lens for the purpose I described. I am an amateur
    > photog, still in the process of learning the features of this camera. I
    > do also have a much smaller Nikon camera (P80, not a DSLR), but I think
    > I would be very disappointed if I had that one and missed a lot of shots
    > that I could have gotten with the D80. Incidentally, I have gone to
    > sites like dpreview, but I am interested in also hearing personal
    > responses from users.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > MaryL
    >



    I have a D80 with the 18-200 lens on it. It is a good walking around
    lens since you won't have to be changing lenses and it is lightweight.
    However, I was disappointed with this lens because it has a lot of
    barreling when shooting straight lines. Try not to zoom it all the way
    and the barreling will not be a bad. For landscapes, it is really
    pretty nice.

    On a side note, this year, I upgraded my equipment and got a D300 with
    the newer Nikon 24-70 lens on it and that is what I will take on our
    next cruise.

    --
    Sheila
    http://swdalton.com
     
    Sheila, Dec 7, 2008
    #6
  7. "MaryL" <-OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote:

    >Have any of you used the 18-200mm
    >f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor lens, especially in combination
    >with the D80?


    I traded in my Canon 20D for a Nikon D300 so I could use this lens. It is a
    wonderful walking around lens. No, it is not the sharpest lens in the world,
    but is plenty sharp enough.

    -- Doug
     
    Douglas Johnson, Dec 7, 2008
    #7
  8. MaryL

    Sheila Guest

    Dimitris M wrote:
    > I understand what you say. I have D300 with 18-200 VR for travel and I have
    > 24-70 with D700 for pro work. You should not compare the world's best zoom
    > Nikkor 24-70 with the poor 18-200 VR that trys to do everything in light
    > weight and low cost.


    Well, I also understand what you are saying but for travel I have
    debated a lot with myself and I have decided if I'm going on cruises, I
    want a camera and lens that can get the pictures that I don't have a 2nd
    chance to get. I took my D80 and 18-200 lens on my last cruise and was
    that convinced to upgrade. Maybe my disappointment came from having
    prior used a D1x until it became too heave to carry all day, and my
    hands are not a steady as they used to be.

    I've just got a Canon G10 stashed away for Christmas which I will use to
    keep in the car.

    >
    > As for the barrel distortion, if you step up just a little to 22mm it
    > disappears. But it's not that. I use this lens without the slightest
    > distortion in all the range from 18 to 200mm. How? I use the DxO software
    > that uses modelling for specific bodies and lenses that corrects
    > automatically any distortion, fringe, CA and reduces effectively softness.
    > The program is not expensive; I think must be around 120 euro's. In practice
    > I could say that this makes your lens to perform as a much better lens.
    > http://www.dxo.com/uk/photo/dxo_optics_pro



    I use PTlens for this, but then you can lose a lot of the photo when you
    have to crop it after you fix the distortion. You're right the
    barreling is better if not used at the extremes and for landscapes it's
    pretty good.

    --
    Sheila
    http://swdalton.com
     
    Sheila, Dec 8, 2008
    #8
  9. MaryL

    Sheila Guest

    Dimitris M wrote:
    > I understand what you say. I have D300 with 18-200 VR for travel and I have
    > 24-70 with D700 for pro work. You should not compare the world's best zoom
    > Nikkor 24-70 with the poor 18-200 VR that trys to do everything in light
    > weight and low cost.


    How much better do you like your D700 over your D300? I'm happy with my
    D300 but of course I would like to have had the D700.


    >
    > As for the barrel distortion, if you step up just a little to 22mm it
    > disappears. But it's not that. I use this lens without the slightest
    > distortion in all the range from 18 to 200mm. How? I use the DxO software
    > that uses modelling for specific bodies and lenses that corrects
    > automatically any distortion, fringe, CA and reduces effectively softness.
    > The program is not expensive; I think must be around 120 euro's. In practice
    > I could say that this makes your lens to perform as a much better lens.
    > http://www.dxo.com/uk/photo/dxo_optics_pro



    --
    Sheila
    http://swdalton.com
     
    Sheila, Dec 8, 2008
    #9
  10. MaryL

    MaryL Guest

    "MaryL" <-OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote in message
    news:493b36d7$0$5493$...
    >I have a Nikon D80 with 18-135 kit lens (18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX
    >Zoom-Nikkor ) and also a 70-300 lens (70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR
    >Zoom-Nikkor). I am planning a trip to Greece in the spring, and a great
    >deal of walking will be involved. The 70-300 lens is rather heavy, and it
    >really would not be practical for me to carry two lenses and try to
    >constantly change them since I will be traveling with a group. So, I am
    >interested in a "walk-around" lens that will be more practical, be good
    >quality but not "break the bank" quality. Have any of you used the
    >18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor lens, especially in
    >combination with the D80? If so, I would appreciate your thoughts about
    >this lens for the purpose I described. I am an amateur photog, still in
    >the process of learning the features of this camera. I do also have a much
    >smaller Nikon camera (P80, not a DSLR), but I think I would be very
    >disappointed if I had that one and missed a lot of shots that I could have
    >gotten with the D80. Incidentally, I have gone to sites like dpreview, but
    >I am interested in also hearing personal responses from users.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > MaryL
    >


    Thanks, everyone. Your responses have been very helpful. Based on various
    reports -- what I read here, some reviews, anecdotal reports other places on
    the Internet -- I have decided to bite the bullet and buy the 18-200 lens.
    Now, I need to investigate prices and availability.

    MaryL
     
    MaryL, Dec 8, 2008
    #10
  11. MaryL

    MaryL Guest

    "Dimitris M" <> wrote in message
    news:1228668567.602409@athprx03...
    > It is the perfect travel "do everything" lens. I have use it as my main
    > lens in the D70 from December 2005 and after with my D300 The second is
    > the Tokina 12-24. When you will become familiar with the VR, you can have
    > nice steady shoots at 200mm with 1/16s and even at 1/4s, if you are steady
    > enough, you will have more than 50% success in steady subjects.
    >
    > I wish you wonderfull vacations here in Greece ;-)
    > --
    > Dimitris M
    >
    >


    Thanks! I am excited about the upcoming vacation in Greece. I decided to
    buy the 18-200 lens, so that means I will have several months to practice.

    You said I can have steady shots after I "become familiar with the VR." Can
    you give me some tips on what I should do (or avoid doing) with regard to
    VR?

    MaryL
     
    MaryL, Dec 8, 2008
    #11
  12. MaryL

    Sheila Guest

    Dimitris M wrote:
    > In normal light both cameras are almost equal. D300 have faster autofocus in
    > 3D full 51 focus points (after the firmware update, makes me look every day
    > in Nikon for an update for the D700). In low light D700 opened a new world
    > in front of my eyes. It is almost 2 stop faster. With a fast lens I can
    > shoot handheld practicaly everyware. In 6.400 ISO is as D300 in 2.000 ISO.
    > If I shoot in RAW in low ISO (1600 or less) I have plenty of room (dynamic
    > area) to bring back in life almost completlely dark areas if I want to. Is
    > no need for fill-in flash as the shadows can be preserved easily.
    >
    > In the near furure I wll change the D300 for a D90, just to have a very
    > light easy camera with my 18-200 when I want to travel light. D700 + 24-70
    > is very heavy and bulk. I can not make street photo's without attract the
    > people's attention.



    Thanks for the detailed reply, mostly I shoot in normal light so I am
    glad that the lighter and less expensive D300 is almost as good as the
    D700. I have been shooting some lower light photos with my D300 and
    have been much happier with the results compared to the D80. I shot
    some very low light photos a couple days ago that had quite a bit of noise.

    With a tripod I can shoot low light very nicely.

    --
    Sheila
    http://swdalton.com
     
    Sheila, Dec 8, 2008
    #12
  13. MaryL

    MaryL Guest

    Thank you very much. This is very helpful -- and your English is fine!

    MaryL


    "Dimitris M" <> wrote in message
    news:1228733356.997854@athprx03...
    > Excuse my poor english. I hope that I will make clear what I want to tell.
    >
    >
    >
    > The VR performs better after some time and experience with it. You must
    > expect that some times will make miracles, when you are stable and some
    > times (few) it will disappoint you.
    >
    >
    >
    > You must understand that the width of movement (correction) have limits.
    > When you look through the viewfinder and press half way the release you
    > will see the image stabilized. If the camera changes azimuth just a
    > little, in the viewfinder you will see nothing to change as the servo
    > mechanism corrects this. If you move a little more, you will reach the end
    > of possible transition (movement) of the small floating crystal. In this
    > moment, the lens VR it will reset the crystal in the middle. So when you
    > become experienced you will press the release just after the set (or
    > reset) of the correcting crystal. In the tele end is well visible in the
    > viewfinder and easy to become familiar. I normally press the shooter just
    > after I see in the viewfinder the subject stabilized. If I late, I wait
    > for the slight movement that indicates that the crystal is been reset and
    > then I take the picture. It is more easy than it looks.
    >
    >
    >
    > Another is to know when to choose "active" or "normal" stabilization. In
    > most situations "normal" is better and permits panning, from the other
    > hand it can interpret slow movements of you as panning and decide to not
    > correct in this direction. "Active" is better when you are not stable, if
    > you are in a vehicle etc.
    >
    >
    >
    > If you shoot in the tele end, from 100 to 200mm with very low speed in the
    > area of 1/16 to 1/4 it is a good idea, if you can, to take 2-3 shoots to
    > choose the best. As I told before, when the end of crystal travel is
    > reached the crystal is reset. 1/4 sec is enough time so if you slowly
    > moves, the crystal can be reset during the shoot and the photo become as
    > double exposed or as to have ghosts. The blurred photos with the VR are
    > completely different from the normal blurred from camera shake. It
    > resamples the blurred photos when shoot with flash at "slow" sync.
    >
    >
    >
    > Another thing is that you should understand that the VR can not correct
    > for subject move (except panning).
    >
    >
    >
    > The impressive results are in the tele area and are more impressive as you
    > reach the tele end. Is not at all impressive in the low end. At 18mm I can
    > shoot clear pictures at 1/8 without the VR. With it I can shoot at 1/4,
    > but not so at 1/2. So when you become familiar you can gain 4+ stops at
    > the high end, but no more than 1 to 2 stops in the low end.
    >
    >
    >
    > I hope the above to be some helpful. I am electronics engineer more than I
    > am photographer so I always want to understand and analyze "how it works"
    > under the surface.
    >
    >
    >
    > Friendly,
    >
    > --
    > Dimitris M
    >
    >
    >
    >>
    >> You said I can have steady shots after I "become familiar with the VR."
    >> Can you give me some tips on what I should do (or avoid doing) with
    >> regard to VR?
    >>
    >> MaryL

    >
    >
     
    MaryL, Dec 8, 2008
    #13
  14. MaryL

    SMS Guest

    MaryL wrote:

    > Thanks, everyone. Your responses have been very helpful. Based on
    > various reports -- what I read here, some reviews, anecdotal reports
    > other places on the Internet -- I have decided to bite the bullet and
    > buy the 18-200 lens. Now, I need to investigate prices and availability.


    Amazon is nearly always the least expensive, non-rip-off vendor. But
    they don't show up in price search engines like Google's because they
    don't pay to be listed.
     
    SMS, Dec 8, 2008
    #14
  15. MaryL

    MaryL Guest

    "SMS" <> wrote in message
    news:uWa%k.9186$...
    > MaryL wrote:
    >
    >> Thanks, everyone. Your responses have been very helpful. Based on
    >> various reports -- what I read here, some reviews, anecdotal reports
    >> other places on the Internet -- I have decided to bite the bullet and buy
    >> the 18-200 lens. Now, I need to investigate prices and availability.

    >
    > Amazon is nearly always the least expensive, non-rip-off vendor. But they
    > don't show up in price search engines like Google's because they don't pay
    > to be listed.


    I have already checked amazon.com. I buy a great many items from them, but
    I am dubious about using them for this purpose. It is extraordinarily
    difficult to send messages if there are any problems -- no "real" person to
    contact. I have had good results from B&H and Adorama. We also have a
    BestBuy nearby, but there prices for photography equipment are usually very
    high.

    MaryL
     
    MaryL, Dec 8, 2008
    #15
  16. MaryL

    MaryL Guest

    Re: Optical Image Stabilization, which mode? The definitive answer. (was Re: Request views on Nikon 18-200 lens)

    "Theodore Parget" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sat, 6 Dec 2008 20:37:10 -0600, "MaryL"
    > <-OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote:
    >
    >
    > IS Modes: Advantages vs. Disadvantages
    >
    >


    Excellent! Thank you very much.

    MaryL
     
    MaryL, Dec 8, 2008
    #16
  17. MaryL wrote:
    >
    > "SMS" <> wrote in message
    > news:uWa%k.9186$...
    >> MaryL wrote:
    >>
    >>> Thanks, everyone. Your responses have been very helpful. Based on
    >>> various reports -- what I read here, some reviews, anecdotal reports
    >>> other places on the Internet -- I have decided to bite the bullet and
    >>> buy the 18-200 lens. Now, I need to investigate prices and availability.

    >>
    >> Amazon is nearly always the least expensive, non-rip-off vendor. But
    >> they don't show up in price search engines like Google's because they
    >> don't pay to be listed.

    >
    > I have already checked amazon.com. I buy a great many items from them,
    > but I am dubious about using them for this purpose. It is
    > extraordinarily difficult to send messages if there are any problems --
    > no "real" person to contact. I have had good results from B&H and
    > Adorama. We also have a BestBuy nearby, but there prices for
    > photography equipment are usually very high.


    My observation at Best Buy (and Circuit City, r.i.p.) is that their
    prices for cables, connectors, etc. are outrageously marked up, and they
    generally don't carry camera equipment I am interested in. B and H I'd
    endorse.

    --
    john mcwilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Dec 8, 2008
    #17
  18. MaryL

    SMS Guest

    MaryL wrote:

    > I have already checked amazon.com. I buy a great many items from them,
    > but I am dubious about using them for this purpose. It is
    > extraordinarily difficult to send messages if there are any problems --
    > no "real" person to contact. I have had good results from B&H and
    > Adorama. We also have a BestBuy nearby, but there prices for
    > photography equipment are usually very high.
    >
    > MaryL


    Amazon's Customer Service Phone Number for the U.S.A. is 1-800-201-7575.
    I've always had very good experiences if there is a problem. You _can_
    talk to a real person, but they don't make it obvious how to do so.
    Finding that phone number on their web site is about impossible.
     
    SMS, Dec 8, 2008
    #18
  19. MaryL

    MaryL Guest

    "SMS" <> wrote in message
    news:X1c%k.7869$...
    > MaryL wrote:
    >
    >> I have already checked amazon.com. I buy a great many items from them,
    >> but I am dubious about using them for this purpose. It is
    >> extraordinarily difficult to send messages if there are any problems --
    >> no "real" person to contact. I have had good results from B&H and
    >> Adorama. We also have a BestBuy nearby, but there prices for photography
    >> equipment are usually very high.
    >>
    >> MaryL

    >
    > Amazon's Customer Service Phone Number for the U.S.A. is 1-800-201-7575.
    > I've always had very good experiences if there is a problem. You _can_
    > talk to a real person, but they don't make it obvious how to do so.
    > Finding that phone number on their web site is about impossible.


    Thanks! This is going into my files. I have usually had good experience
    with Amazon, but it has been nearly impossible to obtain answers on those
    few occasions when there was a problem.

    MaryL
     
    MaryL, Dec 8, 2008
    #19
  20. MaryL

    MaryL Guest

    "SMS" <> wrote in message
    news:jtc%k.6398$...
    > MaryL wrote:
    >>
    >> "SMS" <> wrote in message
    >> news:X1c%k.7869$...
    >>> MaryL wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> I have already checked amazon.com. I buy a great many items from them,
    >>>> but I am dubious about using them for this purpose. It is
    >>>> extraordinarily difficult to send messages if there are any problems --
    >>>> no "real" person to contact. I have had good results from B&H and
    >>>> Adorama. We also have a BestBuy nearby, but there prices for
    >>>> photography equipment are usually very high.
    >>>>
    >>>> MaryL
    >>>
    >>> Amazon's Customer Service Phone Number for the U.S.A. is 1-800-201-7575.
    >>> I've always had very good experiences if there is a problem. You _can_
    >>> talk to a real person, but they don't make it obvious how to do so.
    >>> Finding that phone number on their web site is about impossible.

    >>
    >> Thanks! This is going into my files. I have usually had good experience
    >> with Amazon, but it has been nearly impossible to obtain answers on those
    >> few occasions when there was a problem.

    >
    > All you have to do is Google "Amazon Phone Number."
    >
    > There was a piece of good advice on this as well from
    > "http://amazoncustomerservice.blogspot.com/2007/12/8.html":
    >
    > "Remember when calling Amazon.com customer service that you've got
    > something in common with the representative you'll talk to on the
    > phone....."


    How interesting! I do a lot of googling, but I never thought of that -- I
    just kept going through page after page on the Amazon site and never could
    find anything. They even have links that tell us we will find information
    on a particular location, but it's never there. Thanks, again.

    MaryL
     
    MaryL, Dec 8, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Albert Voss

    Light tele for D70: Sigma 55-200 or Nikon 28-200?

    Albert Voss, Apr 9, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    2,670
    Paolo Pizzi
    Apr 11, 2004
  2. Mike Christie

    Nikon 28-200 G lens on D70

    Mike Christie, Aug 21, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    5,270
    Rodney Myrvaagnes
    Aug 23, 2004
  3. The_AntiArt

    Nikon Coopix 5700 - Is Nikon Views Software Worth Loading?

    The_AntiArt, Oct 2, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    556
  4. Yomama

    Nikon 55-200 lens or Sygma

    Yomama, May 8, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    444
    chuchu
    May 12, 2006
  5. Frank B

    Nikon 18-200 mm VR + Canon Close-up lens 500D

    Frank B, May 13, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    2,940
    Steve
    May 17, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page