Which is better for Nikon D7000 with 18-200 lens or 18-105?

In fact, if you already have a D7000, the 18-200 will feel like a waste of the body. I always think that super large zooms are only for those girls who don’t ask for a deep understanding and everything is automatic, so install a B. None of them work. If you really have a limited budget, you may not be in a hurry to buy a D7000. On the one hand, it is troublesome, and on the other hand, if you buy a second-hand one, you don’t know how to check the quality. If a rich second generation buys a machine that he uses twice a year and then sells it in two years, then of course you will be comfortable, but if it is a professional photographer or photography enthusiast who has eliminated it, the shutter may cost 20,000 to 30,000 a year. If you don’t have an expert who is familiar with this kind of thing to help you refer to it, novices should try to buy a new one. Also talking about the lens issue, if you are not the kind of person who is particularly pursuing the control performance of the body, I would always recommend the Nikon D5200 for entry-level. It has high pixels (not useful at all, but looks great), and has many focus points, 39, and EXPEED3. The processor is the same as the D800 D4 (so the focus is fast), and the most important thing is that it is light. Judging from your situation, you probably prefer to go out and play, so the lightness of the camera is very important. If you are not an enthusiast, you will not want to carry a D4 with you (the body alone weighs 1100 grams). In fact, the key to playing SLR is taking pictures, and the equipment is secondary. Convenience is king, because basically no one can fully utilize the capabilities of the machine. You have to believe that photography is an art, and I don’t see any famous painter choosing brushes every day, right? So if you really want to get started, buy a D5200 and invest 18-200. If you still have money, buy a 35 1.4g dx. What’s better? All practical.