The Time Has Come... - Page 3 - Saxperience

Barry123 · 16th June 2008, 00:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan

they will allways tend to try and give you crap that appaears to be expensive but in reality is cheap (eg memory cards, tacky accessories)

as the mark up is so high on them they wont loose much if they do a deal.

exactly. hence why you haggle and haggle like hell.

thread hijack... Ry how've you found the 17-35?

Ryan^p · 16th June 2008, 00:34

not used it really tbh, shot about 4pics with it on friday then went straight back to 10-20, its a bit wider than the 10-20 in hand and just felt strange.

need to play with it a bit more, or decide if it and the 18-50 are going for 17-40 L

Barry123 · 16th June 2008, 00:38

you're on crack right? the 17-40L is utter crap for a L lens... I'd have the 18-50 anyday over that.

shame. Wasn't a fan of the 17-35 to start with but it's grown on my a fuckadoodledoo it IS sharp as hell. wanna see some 100% from it?

Barry123 · 16th June 2008, 00:39

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...ight=crappiest

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...kit+lens+17-40

Ryan^p · 16th June 2008, 00:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by adsayer

you're on crack right? the 17-40L is utter crap for a L lens... I'd have the 18-50 anyday over that.

shame. Wasn't a fan of the 17-35 to start with but it's grown on my a fuckadoodledoo it IS sharp as hell. wanna see some 100% from it?

im not to unhappy with 17-35 when tested in room seemed sharp just felt strange the other day when i had mashed fingers.

18-50 is the only lens i have with the gay as fuck motor system, thankfully.

Barry123 · 16th June 2008, 00:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan

im not to unhappy with 17-35 when tested in room seemed sharp just felt strange the other day when i had mashed fingers.

18-50 is the only lens i have with the gay as fuck motor system, thankfully.

shame really as the 18-50 has grown on me a bit... certainly the IQ... just let down by the gay AF. Had a go with the 70-200 f2.8 EX... ppphhhwwwahhh.
Then had a go with the 70-200 F/4L USM *JIZZ ALERT - EVERYONE DUCK*
That lens shall be mine before the end of the month... (it'll have to so I get the £45 cashback...

) lol

Ryan^p · 16th June 2008, 01:07

sigma 70-200 seems nice tbh.

lol F4 version because you are to girly to carry the 2.8

18-50 you have one now??? as i say about 18-50 IQ isnt to bad, i really want to smash the thing appart though when AF happens, i cannot stand barrel rotation on af, i like it all internal

Barry123 · 16th June 2008, 01:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan

sigma 70-200 seems nice tbh.

lol F4 version because you are to girly to carry the 2.8

18-50 you have one now??? as i say about 18-50 IQ isnt to bad, i really want to smash the thing appart though when AF happens, i cannot stand barrel rotation on af, i like it all internal

naaa the f4 has higher IQ than the 2.8 weirdly enough, and the IS is equiv. to 4 stops where as the 2.8 is only 3 stops... making the f4 the same in terms of potential shutter speed if working on IS at widest ap.

Obviously the 2.8 would be nice for 1 stop lower light but for the price, weight, lack of time I can see myself using it wide open and the lower IQ...its a no go on the 2.8.

nope I don't have the 18-50mm... just observing reviews and then had a play at Jessops expense the other day.

Ryan^p · 16th June 2008, 01:30

you can see what i mean about the gay AF on the 18-50 then after using it, why sigma used such a gay system is beyond me.

70-200 for me tends to be at 2.8 alot of the time. the weight rocks lol

from forums ive read the f4 owners saying it has higher then the 2.8 owners saying otherwise, alot tends to be about joking about budget and wishing they could afford the 2.8 lol

Barry123 · 16th June 2008, 09:10

swings and roundabouts. I played with both and could perceive any difference... but that was looking through a viewfinder. f4L IS will do me fine

Ryan^p · 16th June 2008, 13:34

as long as you only intend on going to 200mm and not using a TC, as 400mm at F8 will be an arse

Barry123 · 16th June 2008, 14:11

remember4 stops though and the noise control on the 40d is pant wettingly good.

True that man, I doubt I'd ever use a 2x anyway. 1.4x perhaps... which takes it to f5.6 @ 280mm so near enough what my sigma APO DG is doing anyway (EXCEPT I have (4 stop) IS and better IQ and better AF over my old siggy)

so assuming the shutter speed/focal length rule I'd need about 1/640 on a 400mm lens to get a sharp image... 4 stops down is means that I could go as low as 1/40 and still get a sharpish image (maybeeee

) where as the 2.8 is only a 3 stop IS... so it could only go to 1/80... (but then you could stop it up to 5.6) thus go as a low as 1/40 effectively... so we're at the same conclusion

this is my point really I can't see zee point for me going for a 2.8L IS

the £400 could go towards some shit hot prossy or something

jaybiss · 20th June 2008, 18:05

got one and a bag and a 2 gig card and a tripod. Auto settings ftw at the moment

mattchewone · 20th June 2008, 18:17

What bag you get? What sort of price did you get it for dude?

Ryan^p · 20th June 2008, 22:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaybiss

got one and a bag and a 2 gig card and a tripod. Auto settings ftw at the moment

get off auto asap!!

the best thing to do is go manual asap, it helps understanding what does what so much quicker.

jaybiss · 21st June 2008, 11:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan

get off auto asap!!

the best thing to do is go manual asap, it helps understanding what does what so much quicker.

yeah. I've got a lot of reading to do. Going to pester sayer at the weekend

Paid 430. Wasn't the cheapest by far but waned it now for FCS