Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 14 of 18 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 179
  1. #131
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554
    For the extra $1500, I'm going to let ya! LOL

    Do you realize you could almost get BOTH the CZ 24-70mm f/2.8 and the KM AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 (D) for that price? You guys amaze even me.


    On a different note:

    The feel of the α850 is actually noticeable, compared to the α700. It is a "bigger' body, overall, but the weight change is kind of subtle. Although, I recall the α700 was markedly larger that the α3xx series ... so it is going to seem enormous, Ryan.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 09-11-2009 at 09:45 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  2. #132
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,759
    I TRIED THE CZ 16-35mm F/2.8 AGAINST MY SIGMA...WASN'T ENOUGH THERE TO JUSTIFY IT...

  3. #133
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Monmouthshire, UK
    Posts
    2,152
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    For the extra $1500, I'm going to let ya! LOL

    Do you realize you could almost get BOTH the CZ 24-70mm f/2.8 and the KM 17-35 f/2.8-4 for that price? You guys amaze even me.
    Yes but I don't need the 24-70mm. I have my trusty 28-135mm.

  4. #134
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554
    One of the reasons, last year, I bought the KM AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 (D) was upon the suggestion of a highly respected user, back when I was considering the α900. I have not been disappointed with the lens, so far, and it is a heck of a lot lighter than the SONY unit. I likes lightweight!

    So ... where are we at? Middle glass vs the big bucks stuff. I think we can all agree given the money ... you would have elected for Zeiss glass. Not given the money ... a decision is kind of made for you. Go take pictures, make money ... buy better glass.

    Okay ... so there it is.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 09-11-2009 at 01:13 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  5. #135
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,415
    if you're acquisitions are anything to go by, then you do have the money; you just don't use it very wisely.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  6. #136
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,204
    Quote Originally Posted by Peekayoh View Post
    Stop it dr4gon. Boy would I like to swap my KM 17-35mm f/2.8-4 for the CZ 16-35mm F/2.8.
    You know you want it! But see, you don't have a FF sensor, so it wouldn't make as much sense for you.

    I'm just helping you to advocate why Don should elect to better glass. It's no different when Don urges newcomers to ditch their kit lens.
    flickr

    Canon 7D - 5D | 550EX - 430EX II - (2) PW FlexTT5 | 24-105 f4L | 70-200 f2.8L IS | 100 f2.8L IS | 50 f1.8 II

  7. #137
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,759
    Ditch your tamrons..lol

  8. #138
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554

    Unhappy I am stunned ...

    Quote Originally Posted by dr4gon View Post
    You know you want it! But see, you don't have a FF sensor, so it wouldn't make as much sense for you.

    I'm just helping you to advocate why Don should elect to better glass. It's no different when Don urges newcomers to ditch their kit lens.
    Ryan ... I cry "FOUL!"

    I did not create the "kit" misfit ... and that you are impugning my position with a totally unfair representation of my advice. The "kit" lens is an inferior construct as dozens upon dozens of victims will attest. I contend that you learn nothing from using a "poor" lens ... other than feeling a deep sense of desperation to remove it from your camera. Making the move from "reasonable quality" glass to "superior" glass is not even a reasonable comparison. You go too far.

    I'm not sure how you can fairly evaluate my position on this or even state something like this ... but, you are fully entitled to your opinion and I apologize for apparently not making my point clear enough that you would not, in your understanding of the craft, fully appreciate it. If the "kit" is your operating lens of choice ... then enjoy it.

    IMO, I am pretty sure you a wrong in making this comparison and I stand on my evaluation of the 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 "kit" lens.

    "PULL!"


    Having you dismiss or mislead the members may be cause for you re-accessing your own opinion.

    I will admit I am dismayed with this result, but again, say what you will.

    Obviously, you can lead them to water, but that doesn't mean they will be drinking any time soon ... (shaking head in disgust)
    Last edited by DonSchap; 09-11-2009 at 10:10 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  9. #139
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,415
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    Ryan ... I cry "FOUL!"

    I did not create the "kit" misfit ... and that you are impugning my position with a totally unfair representation of my advice. The "kit" lens is an inferior construct as dozens upon dozens of victims will attest. I contend that you learn nothing from using a "poor" lens ... other than feeling a deep sense of desperation to remove it from your camera. Making the move from "reasonable quality" glass to "superior" glass is not even a reasonable comparison. You go too far.

    I'm not sure how you can fairly evaluate my position on this or even state something like this ... but, you are fully entitled to your opinion and I apologize for apparently not making my point clear enough that you would not, in your understanding of the craft, fully appreciate it. If the "kit" is your operating lens of choice ... then enjoy it.

    IMO, I am pretty sure you a wrong in making this comparison and I stand on my evaluation of the 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 "kit" lens.

    Having you dismiss or mislead the members may be cause for you re-accessing your own opinion.

    I will admit I am dismayed with this result, but again, say what you will.

    Obviously, you can lead them to water, but that doesn't mean they will be drinking any time soon ... (shaking head in disgust)
    ryan isnt disputing your advice regarding the kit lens. he agrees with you. all he's saying, (and everyone but you agrees), is that you have some glass that should meet the same fate. fancy spending good money on a 3x TC and then putting it on a kick ass piece of glass like the 200/2.8. i'm sure thats actually illegal in some parts of the world.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  10. #140
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Monmouthshire, UK
    Posts
    2,152
    Tooo right!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •