Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

23 Pages « < 3 4 5 6 7 > » Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

> Grass eating club! Come join, What r u saving up for?what equipment? (Photography)

views
     
xandman
post May 15 2008, 02:32 PM

When Darkness is the only Light U See.
*******
Senior Member
7,214 posts

Joined: Oct 2006
From: Kamino


wahhh...
got bonus d? brows.gif
eddychstu
post May 15 2008, 02:36 PM

Why so serious?
*******
Senior Member
2,347 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: in town


starving for efs10-22 and 70-200 f2.8L
arshad
post May 15 2008, 02:53 PM

Blessed
******
Senior Member
1,424 posts

Joined: Apr 2005
From: Heaven



No la xandman. I not working how to get bonus laugh.gif. Waiting for sponsorship. xD
SUSTheVoIP
post May 15 2008, 02:58 PM

Super General
*******
Senior Member
5,793 posts

Joined: Feb 2005
From: Command & Conquer 3
QUOTE(eddychstu @ May 15 2008, 02:36 PM)
starving for efs10-22 and 70-200 f2.8L
*
I used to have the 10-22. The performance is ok... But because it is not L, it does not have L built nor L color. Thus the color rendering quality is just like other 3rd party or other competitor offering... I mean normal color la... Maybe a CPL can enchance the color lo...

It is why if you have the cash, go FF and get 17-40L. At least still enjoy L color that can show off... icon_rolleyes.gif

This post has been edited by TheVoIP: May 15 2008, 02:59 PM
Mavik
post May 15 2008, 03:04 PM

Patience is a virtue
Group Icon
Elite
7,036 posts

Joined: Jan 2003



QUOTE(TheVoIP @ May 15 2008, 02:58 PM)
I used to have the 10-22. The performance is ok... But because it is not L, it does not have L built nor L color. Thus the color rendering quality is just like other 3rd party or other competitor offering... I mean normal color la... Maybe a CPL can enchance the color lo...

It is why if you have the cash, go FF and get 17-40L. At least still enjoy L color that can show off...  icon_rolleyes.gif
*
I thought normally those with FF would go for the 16-35mm f/2.8 L lens? I have seen quite a number of them being used because of the F/2.8 and also the wide area covered smile.gif
SUSTheVoIP
post May 15 2008, 03:07 PM

Super General
*******
Senior Member
5,793 posts

Joined: Feb 2005
From: Command & Conquer 3
QUOTE(Mavik @ May 15 2008, 03:04 PM)
I thought normally those with FF would go for the 16-35mm f/2.8 L  lens? I have seen quite a number of them being used because of the F/2.8 and also the wide area covered smile.gif
*
Reason are simple... 17-40 is only RM2500... and easily get used one at RM2k or even less

While 16-35 II got no used unit... Price I think RM5000+ You think cheap ar? sweat.gif

The additional RM3k can buy another great lense like 135L already.

For wide angle, personally I do not need f2.8. Even constant f5.6 also enought makan for me... for my standard la.. laugh.gif

So to me, the only different for the prices is only 1mm.... which I think can close one eye la... Unless you are as rich as empire23 la... than get the 16-35! thumbup.gif

This post has been edited by TheVoIP: May 15 2008, 03:08 PM
eddychstu
post May 15 2008, 03:18 PM

Why so serious?
*******
Senior Member
2,347 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: in town


QUOTE(TheVoIP @ May 15 2008, 02:58 PM)
I used to have the 10-22. The performance is ok... But because it is not L, it does not have L built nor L color. Thus the color rendering quality is just like other 3rd party or other competitor offering... I mean normal color la... Maybe a CPL can enchance the color lo...

It is why if you have the cash, go FF and get 17-40L. At least still enjoy L color that can show off...  icon_rolleyes.gif
*
17mm is not the wide angle that will suffice my need, simply not wide enough..and one thing having 17-40L would be redundant to my 24-70L. i guess sometimes we need to scarifies a bit of quality to have better setup doh.gif


ianho
post May 15 2008, 03:22 PM

FISHERM4N
Group Icon
VIP
15,705 posts

Joined: Mar 2005
From: Tg. Rambutan
QUOTE(Ahmike @ May 15 2008, 02:11 PM)
Don't worry lah...each year got bonus.

So each year buy 1 dream lens.

Then the rest of the money use for wife/gf/kids...etc.
*
Heh! Bonus no use 1 lar. Dont forget 1/3 of it already gone back to government as tax. If pakai all bonus when tax time comes mati lor how to pay tax? That time really need to eat grass n make moo mooooo sounds. tongue.gif

This post has been edited by ianho: May 15 2008, 03:23 PM
Mavik
post May 15 2008, 03:23 PM

Patience is a virtue
Group Icon
Elite
7,036 posts

Joined: Jan 2003



QUOTE(TheVoIP @ May 15 2008, 03:07 PM)
Reason are simple... 17-40 is only RM2500... and easily get used one at RM2k or even less

While 16-35 II got no used unit... Price I think RM5000+ You think cheap ar?  sweat.gif

The additional RM3k can buy another great lense like 135L already.

For wide angle, personally I do not need f2.8. Even constant f5.6 also enought makan for me... for my standard la..  laugh.gif

So to me, the only different for the prices is only 1mm.... which I think can close one eye la... Unless you are as rich as empire23 la... than get the 16-35!  thumbup.gif
*
Well at least I know the reason why they got that lens, the only main reason. F/2.8

Btw, Nikon no 16-35mm f/2.8 L USM lens tongue.gif
SUSgogo2
post May 15 2008, 03:24 PM

gogo2
********
All Stars
18,672 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang


QUOTE(ianho @ May 15 2008, 03:22 PM)
Heh! Bonus no use 1 lar. Dont forget 1/3 of it already gone back to government as tax. If pakai all bonus when tax time comes mati lor how to pay tax?  That time really need to eat grass n make moo mooooo sounds.  tongue.gif
*
1/3 ar? means your tax has reached maximum bracket. Wah, VOIP very rich. No wonder can afford 85mm f/1.2.

SUSTheVoIP
post May 15 2008, 03:25 PM

Super General
*******
Senior Member
5,793 posts

Joined: Feb 2005
From: Command & Conquer 3
QUOTE(Mavik @ May 15 2008, 03:23 PM)
Well at least I know the reason why they got that lens, the only main reason. F/2.8

Btw, Nikon no 16-35mm f/2.8 L USM lens tongue.gif
*
Nikon has even better 14-24... BUt there are 2 concern on the Nikon only....

(1) Cannot use condom (I mean protective filter la) to protect the lense... What if it got scrathes? sweat.gif

(2) How to use CPL? hmm.gif
castrodesauza
post May 15 2008, 03:27 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
78 posts

Joined: Feb 2005
From: Subang Jaya


QUOTE(TheVoIP @ May 15 2008, 11:05 AM)
Be warn that Canon 100mm f2.8 macro is not an L lense. For first few years everything will go fine... until all your collection are L lenses, then you feel something missing from the macro lense. Nothing wrong with the image quality thought.... Just it is not L....  tongue.gif
*
You're absolutely true. Haven't play with macro yet. Once I have played with it and start to have the L fever, maybe can eat grass again for 180L macro.... brows.gif the older 100mm macro lense can give to auntie.... tongue.gif
SUSTheVoIP
post May 15 2008, 03:27 PM

Super General
*******
Senior Member
5,793 posts

Joined: Feb 2005
From: Command & Conquer 3
QUOTE(gogo2 @ May 15 2008, 03:24 PM)
1/3 ar? means your tax has reached maximum bracket. Wah, VOIP very rich. No wonder can afford 85mm f/1.2.
*
TheVoIP is a poor man... All money gone to L this and L that already... cry.gif
arshad
post May 15 2008, 03:51 PM

Blessed
******
Senior Member
1,424 posts

Joined: Apr 2005
From: Heaven



tipu lar. thevoip got golden egg in his house. laugh.gif
SUSTheVoIP
post May 15 2008, 03:55 PM

Super General
*******
Senior Member
5,793 posts

Joined: Feb 2005
From: Command & Conquer 3
QUOTE(arshad @ May 15 2008, 03:51 PM)
tipu lar. thevoip got golden egg in his house. laugh.gif
*
I wish... cry.gif

You think if got choice, I still want to use 40D ar? cry.gif
camedemac
post May 15 2008, 05:37 PM

Newbie
*****
Senior Member
954 posts

Joined: Aug 2005
From: Ampang Kg. Pandan Status: Idle



still student
waiting for 50mm f1.8II, 55-250mm IS, BG-E3
even target this cheapo stuff, but still no money to eat grass, just drink pipewater only sweat.gif
arshad
post May 15 2008, 06:31 PM

Blessed
******
Senior Member
1,424 posts

Joined: Apr 2005
From: Heaven



Pipewater still ok what. Eat grass but no water. Lol
TSmyjunk
post May 15 2008, 07:23 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,445 posts

Joined: Jan 2007
sic..sic..sic.. you people taking this thread to the extreme lah.
End up become dream thread.

castrodesauza: Wah.. just spent 6K on the 70-200 2.8 IS and still want more?? Wah.. Where did you get your money tree ah? Can give me some seeds? keke
[]tr|al[]
post May 15 2008, 07:42 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003


saving up for for 24-70 f2.8L n 135 L...oooooh when can i get it?

SUSTheVoIP
post May 15 2008, 07:57 PM

Super General
*******
Senior Member
5,793 posts

Joined: Feb 2005
From: Command & Conquer 3
QUOTE([)
tr|al[],May 15 2008, 07:42 PM]saving up for for 24-70 f2.8L n 135 L...oooooh when can i get it?
*
We share the same dream lenses... I also want the extra 35L only...

Money... Money... Money... cry.gif

This post has been edited by TheVoIP: May 15 2008, 07:58 PM

23 Pages « < 3 4 5 6 7 > » Top
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0298sec    0.45    5 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 26th May 2022 - 10:10 PM