1.3K items sold
13 followers
Contact

About

Location:Ā United StatesMember since:Ā 16 July 2000

Detailed seller ratings

Average for the last 12 months
Accurate description
5.0
Reasonable postage costs
4.9
Postage speed
4.8
Communication
5.0

All feedback (2,512)

  • 3***i (116)- Feedback left by buyer.
    Past 6 months
    Verified purchase
    Arrived as described. Seller was prompt in shipping the item and replied quickly to my questions and concerns.
  • 3***a (819)- Feedback left by buyer.
    Past year
    Verified purchase
    Great seller, good communication. fast shipping A++++ seller highly recommended.
  • p***2 (644)- Feedback left by buyer.
    Past 6 months
    Verified purchase
    Great seller
  • b***w (268)- Feedback left by buyer.
    Past 6 months
    Verified purchase
    Looks exactly as shown and described. Thank you!
  • o***g (737)- Feedback left by buyer.
    Past year
    Verified purchase
    Great communication! Great deal! Fast shipping!!!
  • 0***n (610)- Feedback left by buyer.
    Past year
    Verified purchase
    A+++++ Item was as advertised and fast shipping. Thx.
Reviews (11)
04 December 2008
2.8 is better then VR
This lens is better than you would expect. Decent build quality certainly better than a nikon amateur zoom lens like the 18-70 or 18-55. Sharp in the center even at 2.8. I never used it on full frame. Produces images with excellent dreamy bokeh. I never shot it on full frame. For reasons I don't understand it does occasionally miss focus but good technique reduces this possibility. As far as I am concerned any nikon non AF-S lens has this problem anyway. Perfect focal length for for shooting people. You need this lens if you are shooting a wedding on a budget. There is no substitute for a 2.8 lens. Buy and sell it used it will cost you nothing. Supierior to the 18-200 in brightness and possibly sharpness at these lenghts. Worst problem is nasty moustache distortion at wide end but this would not be used as a wide lens. Best feature is very decent macro performance and small size. Also I like the zoom lock feature for walking. I rate as excellent taking into account price and size. Nikon prime lenses are brighter and sharper in these focal lenghts but don't have macro or zoom. A nikon 2.8 17-55 or 24-70 are monsters in size and weight in comparison. Perfect walk around lens that does not stick out like pro 2.8 nikon. Oh yes it kind of needs a hood as it does flare quite easily. Don't even think of using stup up rings (67 to 77) as it will flare. To give you an idea of my taste I think the 18-70 sucks. The 18-200 has unacceptable distortion. The 18-55 is not that sharp as rockwell says. The 17-55 2.8 is Awesome from 24-55. The 105 micro is perfect. The 50 1.8 is super sharp and does not ghost like the 1.4. The 12-24 sucks wider than 18 and the tokina 2.8 11-16 is incredible on a d300. The 70-300VR is the best amateur zoom nikon makes. www.robwouds.com
2 of 2 found this helpful
04 December 2008
2.8 is better then VR
This lens is better than you would expect. Decent build quality certainly better than a nikon amateur zoom lens like the 18-70 or 18-55. Sharp in the center even at 2.8. I never used it on full frame. Produces images with excellent dreamy bokeh. I never shot it on full frame. For reasons I don't understand it does occasionally miss focus but good technique reduces this possibility. As far as I am concerned any nikon non AF-S lens has this problem anyway. Perfect focal length for for shooting people. You need this lens if you are shooting a wedding on a budget. There is no substitute for a 2.8 lens. Buy and sell it used it will cost you nothing. Supierior to the 18-200 in brightness and possibly sharpness at these lenghts. Worst problem is nasty moustache distortion at wide end but this would not be used as a wide lens. Best feature is very decent macro performance and small size. Also I like the zoom lock feature for walking. I rate as excellent taking into account price and size. Nikon prime lenses are brighter and sharper in these focal lenghts but don't have macro or zoom. A nikon 2.8 17-55 or 24-70 are monsters in size and weight in comparison. Perfect walk around lens that does not stick out like pro 2.8 nikon. Oh yes it kind of needs a hood as it does flare quite easily. Don't even think of using stup up rings (67 to 77) as it will flare. To give you an idea of my taste I think the 18-70 sucks. The 18-200 has unacceptable distortion. The 18-55 is not that sharp as rockwell says. The 17-55 2.8 is Awesome from 24-55. The 105 micro is perfect. The 50 1.8 is super sharp and does not ghost like the 1.4. The 12-24 sucks wider than 18 and the tokina 2.8 11-16 is incredible on a d300. The 70-300VR is the best amateur zoom nikon makes. www.robwouds.com
2 of 2 found this helpful
27.2 x 330mm Thomson Masterpiece Setback Seatpost Black
27 December 2017
Looks and feels great
time will tell!

About

Use this space to tell other eBay members about yourself and what you’re passionate about. Give people more reasons to follow you!1/1000