Jump to content

Official General Photography Thread Part II


CRG7

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 587
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I'm betting good money that went promptly on a steak?

 

Got my camera last night at 1 am when I got home after driving for 12 hours solid. I'm in love :wub:

 

DSC_5940.jpg

 

DSC_5941.jpg

 

we have the same camera! even the battery grip. quit trying to be like me kegger, j/k.

 

6400 iso aint all that on that camera even with NR on high. still a little noisy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thinking about picking up a 70-200 2.8.

 

One side is saying save up and get the Nikkor with VR...

But the other side is saying this for much cheaper, but still great quality....

 

HELP ME!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thinking about picking up a 70-200 2.8.

 

One side is saying save up and get the Nikkor with VR...

But the other side is saying this for much cheaper, but still great quality....

 

HELP ME!!!!!!!

save for 17-55

 

sexy lens but not as sexy as you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm considering the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 (I like the close focus over the Tamron) which is just as sharp as the Tamron. No need for the 17-55 when the Sigma and Tamron come extremely close to it's sharpness and contrast/colors.

 

If I was you, I'd go with that Sigma 70-200 f2.8 over the Nikon variant. Half the cost and probably 90% as good as the Nikon. Look at the reviews at B&H.....almost perfect score accross the board from 30+ reviews.....hard to argue with that.

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...orToReadReviews

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd save up for the VR. Not having VR (IS, whatever) in that range really sucks when you start running out of light. I'm kicking myself for getting a 70-200 without IS, now I'm saving up for one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd save up for the VR. Not having VR (IS, whatever) in that range really sucks when you start running out of light. I'm kicking myself for getting a 70-200 without IS, now I'm saving up for one.

 

Yeah, except VR is going to do nothing about stopping motion on a lens that is primarly targeted toward sports shooting. Only the shutter speed is going to help with that. If you are planning to shoot sports or moving objects with the lens, I fail to see the need for VR. If you plan to do some portraits with the lens (which it would also be great for) and expect to do some of that in lower light or indoors.....I'd agree about getting the VR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be doing both sports and portraiture. But I'm also saving up for an alien Bee's setup. So for my portraiture, I'll have all the light I need.

 

But I think I am still gonna save up for the Nikkor, unless the bug bites me really hard, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28-70 2.8?

 

Or the 24-70 2.8.

 

Cuz I'd personally go for the 24-70.

 

And I love ebay, I just bought 2 Sandisk Extreme III 8GB CF cards for 80 bucks. My mom bought me one while I was home and she laid down 120.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I might have just bought a new lens....

 

Found the Sigma 70-200 2.8 for 600 even, free shipping, like never used.....

 

Gary, should I do it?

 

Hrm, that's an excellent price. If you can justify not having VR and weathersealing, I'd go for it. I guess if you want to upgrade later you can always sell it for a minimal loss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines
We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.