wahhh...
got bonus d?

starving for efs10-22 and 70-200 f2.8L

No la xandman. I not working how to get bonus . Waiting for sponsorship. xD

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...

This post has been edited by TheVoIP: May 15 2008, 02:59 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

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?

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..

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!

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

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

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.

This post has been edited by ianho: 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

1/3 ar? means your tax has reached maximum bracket. Wah, VOIP very rich. No wonder can afford 85mm f/1.2.

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?

(2) How to use CPL?

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.... the older 100mm macro lense can give to auntie....

TheVoIP is a poor man... All money gone to L this and L that already...

tipu lar. thevoip got golden egg in his house.

I wish...

You think if got choice, I still want to use 40D ar?

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

Pipewater still ok what. Eat grass but no water. Lol

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

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...

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