i have the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 & Tokina 11-16 already ... now looking to upgrade my 16-85 & then i will stop buying liao ... unless the D400 comes to reality ...

i also wan d7000 =( , d3100 is good but just lack of built in motor

good luck btw

Like duh.

Distortion? 85mm have no distortion (if not is very very little).

i also like 2nd one, ISO 200 one

CY a little personal thing to ask.
since canon has their 85 1.2 and nikon only 85 1.4
by looking at the review of digitalrev regarding 85mm yesterday. I feel Canon is better in term of portrait compare to Nikon.
For landscape. Nikon tapau laa..

So.. have you ever think to use that tempting 1.2?

This post has been edited by aldosoesilo: Feb 22 2011, 05:30 PM

Good luck , siok lo .

i wait for 50mm 1.2 !!

i play my cousin 12-24mm tokina , i like the range. but i prefer 11-16mm but too bad cannot autofocus ...

i only got 1855 , 35mm , sb-700 so far. need one more flash sb-900 to do studio shoot with my cousin but not now , have to wait after awhile

yeah.. sell 16-85n cheap cheapp. laii.. hahaha

Thanks bro.

1Dmk4 + 85L, 5dmk2 + 85L, 7D + 85L. I've used the 3 combination before, conclusion? I still love the 85G I just don't have the patience with 85L's slow AF and also the miss due to misfocus.

hahaha.. well you are so Nikonian then
Looking for my friend who own 85mm 1.2 so can play with it.
hey hey. yesterdays a friend of mine said 85mm on DX is the best range for portrait. what do you think? since you are so portrait I wanted to know your opinion.
thinking to get UWA or 85mm 1.8

SPAM! XD



Just got my 50mm, sweet lens baby. Fast is the word. But the picture was taken with kit lens.

85mm on DX -> too tele. Main reason why I decided to go for D700 and not waiting for D800.

Double the money man...and we're talking 5 figures.

I don't want to play the waiting game. Plus.. the D700 replacement price will be more expensive. It won't be 6k & early shipments would probably be limited & need to order and wait some more.

I buy is what I need... not so much as want. I make a living from taking pics. The D700 satisfies my need. Plus the D3s' only significant difference is the high ISO performance. For now I'm not taking wedding/event pics at ISO 12800.

If only the D3s has higher megapixels like the 5DmkII, then I would be more inclined to buy the D3s because I do print out large sized media. The only reason I didn't go for the 5DmkII is because of the slow autofocus and not so durable/weather sealed body.

This post has been edited by alpha_company: Feb 22 2011, 05:54 PM

can i know d different between 17-35 f2.8 & 16-35 f4...?
izit d nano coating...?
coz both r around d same price...
btw...
ani advice for getting either of d lens...?

This post has been edited by Str33tBoY: Feb 22 2011, 05:51 PM

1635 is new 1735 is old.

1635 is f/4 1735 is f/2.8

1635 has VR and Nanocoat, 1735 does not have.

Lastly, 1635 IQ is better than 1735.

but is the f/4 is quite sharp until cannot make bokehlicious?
and slightly darker?

This post has been edited by Agito666: Feb 22 2011, 05:57 PM

Sure laa.. 2470N at 4930...and also other Nikon items.. all new set

24G belapa ?

Edit : No more 9888 post count

This post has been edited by KTCY: Feb 22 2011, 06:02 PM

cannot spill the bean la on this one.. hehehehe but it's good to know the 70200VR2 is under 6k nEW!

This post has been edited by alpha_company: Feb 22 2011, 06:00 PM

spill the bean or it is just your imagination

1 more thing... for maybe this one reason; the aperture at 2.8.. the 1735 is more expensive & harder to get new.

Otherwise... the 1635 has the advantage.