Support Our Troops!
Support Our Troops!
  
Support Club3G!
 

Go Back   Club3G Forums > Visualization > Audio, Video and Photography
Reload this Page Your next photo purchase?
One of the largest message boards on the web !     Club3G Decals
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Arcade Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

   
Reply
Page 1 of 6 1 23 > Last »
 
Thread Tools
Old 06/20/2006, 01:39 PM   #1 (permalink)
Bicoastal Traveler
 
Jason's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Dale City, VA
Vehicle: '04 4Runner SR5 4WD
Posts: 8,097
Jason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regular
Your next photo purchase?
I don't plan on purchasing anything for a little while, but I would like a long lens and a macro lens as my next new toys.

It's hard to decide between the 300mm f/4 AF-S and the 80-400 f/4-5.6 VR, both having their respective advantages. I'm finding that I really like AF-S lenses though, after buying my first. I have heard the Sigma 80-400 has a bit faster focusing than the Nikon, though.

300 f/4 AF-S


80-400 f/4-5.6 VR



I think I'll probably wind up with this macro lens:

60mm f2.8 Micro-Nikkor


What do you guys want to get?
Jason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/20/2006, 02:47 PM   #2 (permalink)
hookers and blow
 
Damian's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: New York-ish.
Vehicle: 2007 Mazdaspeed 3
Posts: 7,230
Damian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by all
http://mishilo.image.pbase.com/u38/g....auszeit_1.jpg

PENTAX SMC FA 80-320 mm
Damian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/20/2006, 02:49 PM   #3 (permalink)
Bicoastal Traveler
 
Jason's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Dale City, VA
Vehicle: '04 4Runner SR5 4WD
Posts: 8,097
Jason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regular
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian
Quote:
Forbidden

You don't have permission to access /u38/gawi/upload/25012301.auszeit_1.jpg on this server.
Jason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/20/2006, 03:38 PM   #4 (permalink)
hookers and blow
 
Damian's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: New York-ish.
Vehicle: 2007 Mazdaspeed 3
Posts: 7,230
Damian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by all
http://www.pbase.com/gawi/smc_fa_80320

?
Damian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/20/2006, 04:04 PM   #5 (permalink)
Bicoastal Traveler
 
Jason's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Dale City, VA
Vehicle: '04 4Runner SR5 4WD
Posts: 8,097
Jason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regular
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian
Nice, looks better than the Nikon version (70-300). How much?
Jason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/20/2006, 04:13 PM   #6 (permalink)
hookers and blow
 
Damian's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: New York-ish.
Vehicle: 2007 Mazdaspeed 3
Posts: 7,230
Damian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by all
You ready for this?????
























$130 used here in NY.
Damian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/20/2006, 04:23 PM   #7 (permalink)
Bicoastal Traveler
 
Jason's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Dale City, VA
Vehicle: '04 4Runner SR5 4WD
Posts: 8,097
Jason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regular
Badass! The Nikkor goes for $175-$200 usually.
Jason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/20/2006, 09:35 PM   #8 (permalink)
Spring King
 
tracer bullet's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: St. Paul, MN
Vehicle: 01 GT PP
Posts: 2,907
tracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends here
Funny you ask, I'm struggling with that right now.

I'm going to either be cheap and get this: (Canon 24mm 2.8)

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/s...7&cat=2&page=1

Or, "go for it" and get this: (Canon 17-55 2.8 w/ IS)

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/s...&cat=27&page=2

The first one (the 24) would supplement what I already have. About $225 used, end of story. Or... I'd skip buying that one altogether, sell my 17-85 IS, and go for the 17-55 IS alone.

The latter might look off the top to be about the same as what I already have, but everything I read - all the tests and reviews and etc., including the ones with real #'s about MTF, C/A, distortion, etc., all show the 17-55 as pretty much walking all over the 17-85. As much as I want to like my 17-85, I just don't. I never thought I could hate a lens, but I really do, the distortion and C/A are pretty bad, I see it in a lot of my shots. I went to Chicago last weekend on a cheap flight to hang out with family a few days, and most of the shots suck in one way or another. I'm not great to begin with, so I don't need it to be any worse... I don't dislike it because I read tests about it, I dislike it after looking at perhaps 500 shots I've taken over the last 9 months.

The 17-55 supposedly outperforms the 50mm prime I have, which I am absolutely in love with. I can't imagine how a lens can get much better than that.

So - I don't quite know. I've got the money available, it's called home equity line of credit. I'd just rather spend it actually working on the house! On the other hand, I consider photography to be a fun hobby and one of the few I really enjoy, and there's no point in hating my primary lens.
Last edited by tracer bullet; 06/20/2006 at 09:39 PM.
tracer bullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/20/2006, 10:13 PM   #9 (permalink)
I Wangs
 
Anus!'s Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: 1-888-9-ASSHOLE
Vehicle: duh
Posts: 33,197
Anus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by all
what will I get next? I don't know. what I want next? well here's a few things.

Canon 580 flash to replace my sigma that broke.


then I have wanted a macro lens for as long as I can remember. well ok not that long but it seems like that.


and then I've been wanting this to replace my 28-135IS the only thing better than a big white lens is a small one with the red ring.

[img]
Anus! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/21/2006, 01:20 AM   #10 (permalink)
Bicoastal Traveler
 
Jason's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Dale City, VA
Vehicle: '04 4Runner SR5 4WD
Posts: 8,097
Jason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regular
tracer: I think I would go with the 17-55. The 17-85 is known for being a less than stellar lens, plus it would cover that 24mm 2.8 anyway. You seem to have already convinced yourself though.

anus: That 24-105 is supposed to be one hell of a lens if I've read correctly
Jason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/21/2006, 02:28 PM   #11 (permalink)
Joo luk like' a man
 
FLiPMaRC's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: NJ
Vehicle: 2001 Silver GS
Posts: 23,341
FLiPMaRC is one of the reasons this club existsFLiPMaRC is one of the reasons this club existsFLiPMaRC is one of the reasons this club existsFLiPMaRC is one of the reasons this club existsFLiPMaRC is one of the reasons this club existsFLiPMaRC is one of the reasons this club existsFLiPMaRC is one of the reasons this club existsFLiPMaRC is one of the reasons this club existsFLiPMaRC is one of the reasons this club existsFLiPMaRC is one of the reasons this club existsFLiPMaRC is one of the reasons this club exists
Send a message via AIM to FLiPMaRC
Wow
FLiPMaRC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/21/2006, 02:33 PM   #12 (permalink)
Bicoastal Traveler
 
Jason's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Dale City, VA
Vehicle: '04 4Runner SR5 4WD
Posts: 8,097
Jason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regular
I'd really like the new Nikon 105mm AF-S VR macro lens, but the 60mm I posted above would be a good one for me to test the waters to see how much I really like macro shooting

The 60 can be had for around $200 used, the 105 VR is about $800, and still in short supply.

105mm VR macro

Last edited by Jason; 06/21/2006 at 02:44 PM.
Jason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/21/2006, 03:57 PM   #13 (permalink)
hookers and blow
 
Damian's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: New York-ish.
Vehicle: 2007 Mazdaspeed 3
Posts: 7,230
Damian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by all
I'd like to get this lens too, but its a bit pricey.



30mm f1.4. I use my old Pentax 1.7 50mm as my main lens, but the crop factor makes it a bit long. This would be a nice alternative. I've been looking for an old Pentax 28mm with an auto-aperture, but they're tough to find. Might have to bite the big one and go new.
Damian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/21/2006, 04:07 PM   #14 (permalink)
I Wangs
 
Anus!'s Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: 1-888-9-ASSHOLE
Vehicle: duh
Posts: 33,197
Anus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by all
for you wide angle guys, why not just get a fisheye? well for you wide angle guys that have a budget up to like $500.
Anus! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/21/2006, 04:22 PM   #15 (permalink)
hookers and blow
 
Damian's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: New York-ish.
Vehicle: 2007 Mazdaspeed 3
Posts: 7,230
Damian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by allDamian seems to be well-liked by all
Tracer - I agree with Jason on the 17-55mm. Although, do they make one without IS? It hardly seems necessary on a lens that wide with a max aperture of 2.8?. Anyway - I have Pentax's 16-45mm, and I love it. It ain't quite the same speed, at a constant 4.0, but it's a great range.

Rick - Are you talkin' to me?
Damian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/21/2006, 04:50 PM   #16 (permalink)
I Wangs
 
Anus!'s Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: 1-888-9-ASSHOLE
Vehicle: duh
Posts: 33,197
Anus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by allAnus! seems to be well-liked by all
eh, anyone that is looking to get a wider view from their lens because of the crop factor. I use my sigma fisheye for all my wide angle stuff.
Anus! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/21/2006, 05:21 PM   #17 (permalink)
Bicoastal Traveler
 
Jason's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Dale City, VA
Vehicle: '04 4Runner SR5 4WD
Posts: 8,097
Jason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regularJason should be considered a regular
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian
I'd like to get this lens too, but its a bit pricey.



30mm f1.4. I use my old Pentax 1.7 50mm as my main lens, but the crop factor makes it a bit long. This would be a nice alternative. I've been looking for an old Pentax 28mm with an auto-aperture, but they're tough to find. Might have to bite the big one and go new.
I'm interested in that lens as well

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anus!
for you wide angle guys, why not just get a fisheye? well for you wide angle guys that have a budget up to like $500.
I'd love to get the Nikon 10.5 fisheye, but I'd also not want to count on de-fishing every photo that I don't want that effect on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian
Tracer - I agree with Jason on the 17-55mm. Although, do they make one without IS? It hardly seems necessary on a lens that wide with a max aperture of 2.8?. Anyway - I have Pentax's 16-45mm, and I love it. It ain't quite the same speed, at a constant 4.0, but it's a great range.

Rick - Are you talkin' to me?
They only make the IS version I believe. I was wondering why they did that as well, especially considering that it's a f2.8, but it's also odd that they'd do it on a lens with such a short focal length range. The only real reason I could see IS on that lens is for probably wedding shooters, who could use it wide open without flash in low light for posed shots.
Last edited by Jason; 06/21/2006 at 05:25 PM.
Jason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06/21/2006, 08:34 PM   #18 (permalink)
Spring King
 
tracer bullet's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: St. Paul, MN
Vehicle: 01 GT PP
Posts: 2,907
tracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends heretracer bullet has a few friends here
I also think the IS is overkill for a 2.8, but - it would certainly be fun even if it wasn't necessary. I wonder how long you could hand-hold a shot with it? You could take pictures in absolute darkness. Well, not quite but you know inside of bars, etc. pretty easily without a flash.

That Sigma 30-1.4 was on my short list of choices, along with the Canon 24-2.8, 28-2.8, and 28-1.8. From reading only, and you know how t