paiseh for asking, but why the 17-55 so crazily expensive arh? no IS no VR or whatever. canon equivalent is like 500-1k cheaper with IS.

paiseh for asking, but why the 17-55 so crazily expensive arh? no IS no VR or whatever. canon equivalent is like 500-1k cheaper with IS.

Need to sell organ baru can buy

Back and bank breaker, the 200mm f/2 I mean

Because got gold ring mah. 

To date, it's the only pro f/2.8 DX lens to come out if I'm not mistaken. Other pro lenses made for FX.
People can still survive with one kidney.   


Pics taken with it is super beautiful. 

I think I might scrap the 17-55 and get the 24-70 since I can borrow my friends Tokina 11-16 anytime to cover the wide focal length.

Before you perform this test, did you disable AF engagement for shutter half-press? Set the "AF Activation" option to "AF-ON only". For D600 it's option f4 if not wrong and since no dedicated button on D600 (and D7000) for AF-On, use the AE-L/AF-L button as the AF-ON button.

Also, for the test to be accurate, you need to make sure that your camera sensor is parallel to the newspaper or any intended object and also on the same plane.

For that you need something like LensAlign to correctly place the target and make the test more meaningful as you can manually set and determine the focal plane of the target to be parallel to the camera sensor plane.

paiseh for asking, but why the 17-55 so crazily expensive arh? no IS no VR or whatever. canon equivalent is like 500-1k cheaper with IS.

If u ever touch the nikon 17-55, then u touch back canon 1755 , u will have the answer

The nikon 1755 just like a german 2.0 turbo engine in german chassis while the canon just like german 2.0 turbo engine in proton chassis



There is stil alot of space to improve the build quality of canon 1755, but when everything is prefect,  then u have to pay premier price

Full metal body bro (except for the hood which is plastic obviously...)

and have that heavy expensive lens feeling.. fuuu... too bad I dropped getting the 17-55 and ordered the 70-200 which I will be using frequently. 

70-200? nikon 70-200 vr II?

VRII

wa that one is much expensive 

Must be a stupid reason for me to say this to you but I guess I felt that I want to change to FX in a few years and I thought that the 70-200 would be a good choice since I take event photos and I've been using my 18-200 VRII 3.5-5.6 all the time and just can't get those shots at >120mm correctly exposed, so thought that the 70-200 2.8 might help me with that.

INB4 what happened to the 24-70 2.8 ( or DX 17-55 2.8 :v)

Must be a stupid reason for me to say this to you but I guess I felt that I want to change to FX in a few years and I thought that the 70-200 would be a good choice since I take event photos and I've been using my 18-200 VRII 3.5-5.6 all the time and just can't get those shots at >120mm correctly exposed, so thought that the 70-200 2.8 might help me with that.

INB4 what happened to the 24-70 2.8 ( or DX 17-55 2.8 :v)

What sort of events do you shoot?

Official events like inauguration, someone getting datukship at the palace, monthly gathering in the hall, etc.
Events which basically involves VIP and the authority sets a place that only the photographers can be there.

then that's the lens to go. 70-200.

Official events like inauguration, someone getting datukship at the palace, monthly gathering in the hall, etc.
Events which basically involves VIP and the authority sets a place that only the photographers can be there.