Don't sell a lens you love until you are sure you are done with it. Buy that 16-35 f/2.8 and don't sell the 17-40 f/4. You can always return the 16-35 within 30 days if you buy mail order from B&H, Adorama &etc. See if you still use your 17-40 in a week or so. There really isn't much risk. You can return or sell one later.
The same is true of the 10-22. You can always sell or return it.
Andy has been trying to teach us. Your photographic equipment shouldn't be viewed as a static asset. It's an asset pool. You swap in and out new elements as it fits your will and needs. Take good care of your stuff and you lose little when you sell. It's a very modern view.
Thanks, Rutt. I had come to that conclusion last night just before I quit research, that if I got the 16-35, I would keep the 17-40 until I knew why I had the other.
Am just curious re the thinking ahead of time. FM is sure a kicker to read, on some lenses, well, the 55 macro, or whatever that you suggest that is not a total macro, I think it got excellent reviews on FM, when I read them a few months ago. But the reviews I was reading on the 16-35L and the 100 Macro, both had good and bad, people who loved and people who hated.
I am pretty easy re a lens, am not very critical, don't know enough, smile.
Some people had sent the 16-35 back a time or two before they got one that was not a lemon. I am not sure I would even know. But it did occur to me that no way would I give up the 17-40 until I knew that the 16-35 suited me better.
The macro, it is not as expensive, is not an L lens, whether it is the Canon or the Tamron. So I am not as terribly concerned, but something over 1200.00 or more, as the 16-35L is, that is a different story. It has to be in the stops, ???? One person said not to get it unless you were a pro and a job would pay for the lens as a "non pro" didn't need it.
Well, we all know I do need one fast lens and that could be it.........so I probably will live with both for awhile.
I have the box for my 17-40, but I cannot say that it is in mint condition just from being nicked, or something, it looks used a bit. So if I sell it, it is going to be a damn good deal as I will have to discount for each nick, I imagine.
Thanks, Rutt. I had come to that conclusion last night just before I quit research, that if I got the 16-35, I would keep the 17-40 until I knew why I had the other.
ginger
Try and find a 17-35L 2.8 used.
They're rare, but when you find them, they're affordable.
- Scott http://framebyframe.ca [Bodies] Canon EOS 20D - Canon EOS 500 [Lenses] Sigma APO 70-200 f/2.8 - Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 - Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 - Tamron XR Di 28-75mm f/2.8 - Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6
[Flash] Sigma EF500 Super DG Flash
[Tripod] Manfrotto 055 Pro Black
[Head] 484RC2, 200RC2
ginger! i thought i've told you before to get the tamron 28-75 f2.8. there is a large chunk of focal length that you don't have covered, and this would fill that hole. it also has a very nice, sharp f2.8 aperture.
i think you would absolutely love this lens! check the reviews on fm, it really is comparable to the canon 24-70 f2.8L. it's also a steal for less than $375. i don't shoot macro, so i haven't tried the macro ability of the lens, but i'd only imagine it's good.
i know i probably should like some tamron fanboy, but i really do absolutely love my tamron lens.
ginger! i thought i've told you before to get the tamron 28-75 f2.8. there is a large chunk of focal length that you don't have covered, and this would fill that hole. it also has a very nice, sharp f2.8 aperture.
I agree - that is a great lens. It is my walkaround/most used lens
Harry http://behret.smugmug.com/NANPA member How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
Don't sell a lens you love until you are sure you are done with it. Buy that 16-35 f/2.8 and don't sell the 17-40 f/4. You can always return the 16-35 within 30 days if you buy mail order from B&H, Adorama &etc.
I read many conflicting reviews on the 16-35 on FM. Do any of you have that lens? Is it really better than the 17-40, especially for the difference in price?
Also, the 85's were debated that way, too. Plus, I realized that they are not macros, so the point is not there.
Then the 100 Macro, again, dissenting reviews.
Ginger - you have to get out more
1) the 17-40 and the 16-35 are DIFFERENT my dear. Like corn bread and bread pudding. Or something like that. The 17-40 is wonderful for day-lit landscapes and other tripodded 'scaping, too. The 16-35L was suggested to you, *for you* by people *here* who know what you've been kvetching about - not having the SPEED you need for those baptisms and indoor church shots! Listen to those here who care about you, who understand you, and who use the gear being recommended. You should trust them. Did you know, BTW, that Shay uses the 16-35L for his wedding work?
2) The 85s - I've been through both of them. First the 1.8, then the 1.2 and now the 1.8 again. For way the majority of photographers, the 1.2 is OVERKILL. The 1.8 does a stellar job, is sharp and light, fast focusing.
3) The 100mm macro? You can't go wrong for the money IMO. Super lens. Sharp as all get out. Wonderful for portraits and macros. But it's not a zoom, and it's not going to do much more for you than macros, and 100mm outdoor portraits. You have to decide.
1) the 17-40 and the 16-35 are DIFFERENT my dear. Like corn bread and bread pudding. Or something like that. The 17-40 is wonderful for day-lit landscapes and other tripodded 'scaping, too. The 16-35L was suggested to you, *for you* by people *here* who know what you've been kvetching about - not having the SPEED you need for those baptisms and indoor church shots! Listen to those here who care about you, who understand you, and who use the gear being recommended. You should trust them. Did you know, BTW, that Shay uses the 16-35L for his wedding work?
Ginger, why don't you get Andy to buy this for you? I've seen those shots of him at B&H, picking out the cream of the crop of a particular lens. Nobody could have more experience!
I have a Canon 20D, 400L lens, Canon Extenders, 1.4, and 2.0, 70-200L lens f4, and 17-40 lensL
a good Monopod, a dirty crumpler bag.
Ginger,
Looks like you have all kinds of good advice on the lenes. I don't see a tripod on your list? Also a good monitor is a joy to work with.
Now here is an idea no one has mentioned. Budget about half for photo stuff. Take the remainder and send it to Andy. (That way it won't be spent, and he can give it back in an emergency or preferably at Zion) Go to Zion. You will never meet a bunch of better folks, and this could easily be a once in a life time opportunity.
Ginger, why don't you get Andy to buy this for you? I've seen those shots of him at B&H, picking out the cream of the crop of a particular lens. Nobody could have more experience!
Rutt, that is an idea. That way it would not be a lemon.
What does anyone think about a close up filter, they exist, for the 70-200.
I only want to shoot macros infrequently. The filters are in the 100.00 range.
I do plan to keep my tripod as I can carry it, get a release for the shutter, and a fast release for the top. That is my plan now. When a tripod is an absolute necessity for extra sturdiness, Bill will take his monster thing short distances for me.
I have the 16-35 as a definite! Things are coming together. (going to get a ramp for my arthritic dog with dyplasia.)
(I found an old post about how much Andy loves and uses his 16-35L, so that will be my fast lens, will work out great when I am sitting on the couch with the dogs, would have been good last night, too. (looking out on the harbor in the dark) The faster 70-200 would have been good last night, too, but it is a lens I use much less than a wide. Love wide lenses. They are good inside and out, just love them.)
What does anyone think about a close up filter, they exist, for the 70-200.
I only want to shoot macros infrequently. The filters are in the 100.00 range.
I do plan to keep my tripod as I can carry it, get a release for the shutter, and a fast release for the top. That is my plan now. When a tripod is an absolute necessity for extra sturdiness, Bill will take his monster thing short distances for me.
I have the 16-35 as a definite! Things are coming together. (going to get a ramp for my arthritic dog with dyplasia.)
(I found an old post about how much Andy loves and uses his 16-35L, so that will be my fast lens, will work out great when I am sitting on the couch with the dogs, would have been good last night, too. (looking out on the harbor in the dark) The faster 70-200 would have been good last night, too, but it is a lens I use much less than a wide. Love wide lenses. They are good inside and out, just love them.)
The way you are always taking in Canon equipment (deposits) and sending said eqipment back out, (withdrawal), I didn't think actual money would be much different.
Besides Ginger needs help, apparently Bill and her view money like one day old bread that has to be totaly used up as fast as possible.
Course the good news is if she ever buys anything from you the money won't have any mold on it.
The way you are always taking in Canon equipment (deposits) and sending said eqipment back out, (withdrawal), I didn't think actual money would be much different.
Besides Ginger needs help, apparently Bill and her view money like one day old bread that has to be totaly used up as fast as possible.
Course the good news is if she ever buys anything from you the money won't have any mold on it.
Sam
Sam, as things come together, I am not sure there will be money left. Let us wait til I come to the end of this.
Remember there is still Adobe PS CS2 here, and some stuff we haven't mentioned.
This thing won't come together until around the last of next week. Last year I did have that extra 1000.00 that Bill appropriated (his mother was dying: in Arizona), as soon as he got the money back to me, I used to for whatever I needed it for in the first place.
I am so good at not spending money..............well, it is embarrassing how we live. I have camera equipment. We don't have a clothes dryer that actually blows air, and I have thought that I might take care of that, though I don't have to. Etc. Also I have kids I could "park" my money with.
But let's see how this plays out.............(I don't think I have the money to get an f2.8 70-200 rather than the F4 that I have, but that is in my mind. And it seems to me, though this stuff does not pay interest, in an emergency, if it is a lens, it is as good as parked with Andy. If I take care of it, I can sell it. In fact, even if I don't, I can sell it, just not for as much.)
Anyway, Sam, we are not through here.........though I do have a good start. Much better than a few days ago.
ginger, i think you completely ignored my comment about the tamron 28-75 f2.8. if you're not interested i understand, but i kinda wanted to know what you think about it.
G.. I think your understanding of Photoshop is similar to mine....a self taught hack so if i was you i would buy a few well recommended books on how to improve the shot at home than in the field.
I have learnt a motza from Scott Kelbbys CS2 book. Just follow the bouncing ball & it all happens in front of you. I love it.
Also i think you & harry would compliment each others shooting styles. If i had the opportunity to shoot beside him i would be there in a second.
I will say this right out. I don't think Harry likes me. Plus his group expects to be very large, and are going to be sent out in separate groups. Since Harry is only one person..............well, my time with him would be limited.
Well, there is more to say on that. I was actually thinking, after Rutt said the Zion trip and Andy posted that there was room, that perhaps............
I do think Andy likes me, we have clashed, but there is a history, he did like me, he didn't like me, he is trying very hard, and I really do think he likes me.
Now this is important. One, I am profoundly hard of hearing. That means that if I stand at the front of the pack, can see the person's lips, I can hear about 50% of what they say. If none of that is true, well I just wander off on my own. If it is true, the teacher wonders why I didn't get it all, and I have to ask stupid questions.
And there is the fact that if it is not tangible, I don't like to spend money on it. I would love to go on both of those trips, for free. But at the price of a lens, and at the expense of a lens, I am still thinking.
But I don't think any of you realize how frustrating it is to teach/deal with/be around the hard of hearing. Particularly the profoundly hard of hearing. It is frustrating on both sides. At least the hard of hearing person is used to it, to the hearing person it usually comes as a complete surprise that with the strongest aids possible, this person is not understanding simple "English".
___________________________
I am getting some prices together with my info, both to buy and to sell, possibly. Right now, I am doing that.
_______________
Binghott, I did ignore your comment in that I did not respond to it. I am sorry. There was a point at which I thought that lens was essential for me to own. It was back ordered everywhere. It is in at B&H right now, and it is on my wish list, so I can access the info on it easily. But I have learned that I have had no time when I thought, oh, if I only had that lens. My 17-40 filled in just wonderfully there. It is my church portrait lens.
I have not ruled it out, but neither is it particularly high in priorities. I love long, I love short, but I don't seem to love normal. Smile.
_________________________
Rutt, someone, mentioned the coveted 10-22, I just put it on my wish list for access. As just a thought...........not a heavy priority, but I would get it over a normal lens.
____________________________
Gus, I have more books than you could think of! I have Kelby's book, the CS2, I Have other CS2 books, I have the book on RAW and the bridge.........I am a book person, and I have found that a large price in upgrading photoshop is having to get a few books on it, and that grows.
_____________________________
I also have about 5 books on Nature Photography. (One of them told me about the 400mm lens over the 300mm lens that I used to own.)
I have the two Margulis books.
___________________
On my own, w/o mentioning it, I am wondering about the wisdom of trading up to a f2.8 (without IS) in the 70-200. It might make that lens more usable.
____________-
All these are possibilities. Of course, I would like to put all my money in lenses (resale in an emergency), but there are some other things........and I have not fit most of them in yet.
________________
Just right now, I am making a list, again. Then I will start crossing things out. When I get a total list of "wants", then I will go to tossing things out.
On the books and things like that, I will say that I can usually squeeze that money out during the yr. Big ticket items are beyond my reach during the year.
I will say this right out. I don't think Harry likes me. Plus his group expects to be very large, and are going to be sent out in separate groups. Since Harry is only one person..............well, my time with him would be limited.
Well, there is more to say on that. I was actually thinking, after Rutt said the Zion trip and Andy posted that there was room, that perhaps............
I do think Andy likes me, we have clashed, but there is a history, he did like me, he didn't like me, he is trying very hard, and I really do think he likes me.
Ginger wrote: I will say this right out. I don't think Harry likes me.
Here I was drinking my morning coffee quite content. Then I read your post..............now I am very upset. That damn Harry doesn't like me ether! Why, he hasn't so much as sent a Christmas, or birthday card!
I am so sad, bewildered, and confused. I am leaving, I will go eat worms. :cry :cry :cry
Binghott, I did ignore your comment in that I did not respond to it. I am sorry. There was a point at which I thought that lens was essential for me to own. It was back ordered everywhere. It is in at B&H right now, and it is on my wish list, so I can access the info on it easily. But I have learned that I have had no time when I thought, oh, if I only had that lens. My 17-40 filled in just wonderfully there. It is my church portrait lens.
I have not ruled it out, but neither is it particularly high in priorities. I love long, I love short, but I don't seem to love normal. Smile.
thanks ginger, now i get it! there's still no harm in buying it and trying it for such a small price.
quote=ginger_55]I will say this right out. I don't think Harry likes me.
:smooch :feelgood
Harry http://behret.smugmug.com/NANPA member How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
(Snip)
Now this is important. One, I am profoundly hard of hearing. That means that if I stand at the front of the pack, can see the person's lips, I can hear about 50% of what they say. If none of that is true, well I just wander off on my own. If it is true, the teacher wonders why I didn't get it all, and I have to ask stupid questions.
(Snip)
But I don't think any of you realize how frustrating it is to teach/deal with/be around the hard of hearing. Particularly the profoundly hard of hearing. It is frustrating on both sides. At least the hard of hearing person is used to it, to the hearing person it usually comes as a complete surprise that with the strongest aids possible, this person is not understanding simple "English".
(Snip)
___________________________
ginger
I DO Ginger!! We are actually in a fairly similar situation. I am deaf in the left ear and have a profound loss in the right. I wear an aid in the right ear which gives me volume but NOT the subtle little differences that make it words instead of noise. I need lip reading for that and some are so easy to read that they say they forget my hearing loss; others are very hard to read even in a one on one conversation. Isn’t Closed Captioning a God send for TV and tapes? I use a TTY/TDD in combination with the Illinois State Relay Service for VCO phone calls so I can voice rather than type my end of the conversation.
Other things include: I think we are both in our 60's — didn’t you say you are 66 in another post? I am 63. We both have to watch our budget although there are differences partly because I am single and if I decide to save it that is where it goes. We both shoot in our church — I am editor of our newsletter and shoot events for that.
We do have different gear though. I finally got a used D60 (with grip) in August and then had health problems followed by a very expensive replacement of the furnace and central air conditioning in my house. So, have not really added to what I had from film days when I was shooting with a Canon EOS 620. Thankfully my best lens, a 28-70 F3.5-4.5 Mk I, is a range that works well for most of what I want to shoot. As expected, there are times when I wish for something wider. After seeing what some have posted from the "Kit" lens I have been wondering about getting one of those and having it modified for the older body. But, am trying to also find out how much more, if any, I would have to put out to get something better by any mfg. Please see this thread http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=232472#post232472
Comments
Thanks, Rutt. I had come to that conclusion last night just before I quit research, that if I got the 16-35, I would keep the 17-40 until I knew why I had the other.
Am just curious re the thinking ahead of time. FM is sure a kicker to read, on some lenses, well, the 55 macro, or whatever that you suggest that is not a total macro, I think it got excellent reviews on FM, when I read them a few months ago. But the reviews I was reading on the 16-35L and the 100 Macro, both had good and bad, people who loved and people who hated.
I am pretty easy re a lens, am not very critical, don't know enough, smile.
Some people had sent the 16-35 back a time or two before they got one that was not a lemon. I am not sure I would even know. But it did occur to me that no way would I give up the 17-40 until I knew that the 16-35 suited me better.
The macro, it is not as expensive, is not an L lens, whether it is the Canon or the Tamron. So I am not as terribly concerned, but something over 1200.00 or more, as the 16-35L is, that is a different story. It has to be in the stops, ???? One person said not to get it unless you were a pro and a job would pay for the lens as a "non pro" didn't need it.
Well, we all know I do need one fast lens and that could be it.........so I probably will live with both for awhile.
I have the box for my 17-40, but I cannot say that it is in mint condition just from being nicked, or something, it looks used a bit. So if I sell it, it is going to be a damn good deal as I will have to discount for each nick, I imagine.
later,
ginger
They're rare, but when you find them, they're affordable.
http://framebyframe.ca
[Bodies] Canon EOS 20D - Canon EOS 500
[Lenses] Sigma APO 70-200 f/2.8 - Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 - Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 - Tamron XR Di 28-75mm f/2.8 - Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6
[Flash] Sigma EF500 Super DG Flash
[Tripod] Manfrotto 055 Pro Black
[Head] 484RC2, 200RC2
i think you would absolutely love this lens! check the reviews on fm, it really is comparable to the canon 24-70 f2.8L. it's also a steal for less than $375. i don't shoot macro, so i haven't tried the macro ability of the lens, but i'd only imagine it's good.
i know i probably should like some tamron fanboy, but i really do absolutely love my tamron lens.
I agree - that is a great lens. It is my walkaround/most used lens
Not greedy Gin. Just need that lens to round out my primes. But, if you insist... is this better?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=108421&is=USA&addedTroughType=search
MUCH better. Wondered why you wouldn't go for the gem in the first place!
http://cusac.smugmug.com
She can't have it. That's mine!!!!!!
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
http://www.keh.com/shop/SHOWPRODUCT.CFM?CRID=13274617&SKID=CE06999049055R4&SID=newused&BID=CE&CID=06&SOID=N&curpic=0&dpsp=0
"Osprey Whisperer"
OspreyWhisperer.com
Be careful. B&H is 14 days, for example, not 30.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Ginger - you have to get out more
1) the 17-40 and the 16-35 are DIFFERENT my dear. Like corn bread and bread pudding. Or something like that. The 17-40 is wonderful for day-lit landscapes and other tripodded 'scaping, too. The 16-35L was suggested to you, *for you* by people *here* who know what you've been kvetching about - not having the SPEED you need for those baptisms and indoor church shots! Listen to those here who care about you, who understand you, and who use the gear being recommended. You should trust them. Did you know, BTW, that Shay uses the 16-35L for his wedding work?
2) The 85s - I've been through both of them. First the 1.8, then the 1.2 and now the 1.8 again. For way the majority of photographers, the 1.2 is OVERKILL. The 1.8 does a stellar job, is sharp and light, fast focusing.
3) The 100mm macro? You can't go wrong for the money IMO. Super lens. Sharp as all get out. Wonderful for portraits and macros. But it's not a zoom, and it's not going to do much more for you than macros, and 100mm outdoor portraits. You have to decide.
Hope this helps.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Ginger, why don't you get Andy to buy this for you? I've seen those shots of him at B&H, picking out the cream of the crop of a particular lens. Nobody could have more experience!
a good Monopod, a dirty crumpler bag.
Ginger,
Looks like you have all kinds of good advice on the lenes. I don't see a tripod on your list? Also a good monitor is a joy to work with.
Now here is an idea no one has mentioned. Budget about half for photo stuff. Take the remainder and send it to Andy. (That way it won't be spent, and he can give it back in an emergency or preferably at Zion) Go to Zion. You will never meet a bunch of better folks, and this could easily be a once in a life time opportunity.
Sam
:nono I am not a bank.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Rutt, that is an idea. That way it would not be a lemon.
I wonder if he would.
I actually don't get the money until next friday.
ginger
I only want to shoot macros infrequently. The filters are in the 100.00 range.
I do plan to keep my tripod as I can carry it, get a release for the shutter, and a fast release for the top. That is my plan now. When a tripod is an absolute necessity for extra sturdiness, Bill will take his monster thing short distances for me.
I have the 16-35 as a definite! Things are coming together. (going to get a ramp for my arthritic dog with dyplasia.)
(I found an old post about how much Andy loves and uses his 16-35L, so that will be my fast lens, will work out great when I am sitting on the couch with the dogs, would have been good last night, too. (looking out on the harbor in the dark) The faster 70-200 would have been good last night, too, but it is a lens I use much less than a wide. Love wide lenses. They are good inside and out, just love them.)
ginger
http://www.pricegrabber.com/search_getprod.php/masterid=745457/search=canon+close-up
cheap. Pretty darn good.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Andy,
The way you are always taking in Canon equipment (deposits) and sending said eqipment back out, (withdrawal), I didn't think actual money would be much different.
Besides Ginger needs help, apparently Bill and her view money like one day old bread that has to be totaly used up as fast as possible.
Course the good news is if she ever buys anything from you the money won't have any mold on it.
Sam
Sam, as things come together, I am not sure there will be money left. Let us wait til I come to the end of this.
Remember there is still Adobe PS CS2 here, and some stuff we haven't mentioned.
This thing won't come together until around the last of next week. Last year I did have that extra 1000.00 that Bill appropriated (his mother was dying: in Arizona), as soon as he got the money back to me, I used to for whatever I needed it for in the first place.
I am so good at not spending money..............well, it is embarrassing how we live. I have camera equipment. We don't have a clothes dryer that actually blows air, and I have thought that I might take care of that, though I don't have to. Etc. Also I have kids I could "park" my money with.
But let's see how this plays out.............(I don't think I have the money to get an f2.8 70-200 rather than the F4 that I have, but that is in my mind. And it seems to me, though this stuff does not pay interest, in an emergency, if it is a lens, it is as good as parked with Andy. If I take care of it, I can sell it. In fact, even if I don't, I can sell it, just not for as much.)
Anyway, Sam, we are not through here.........though I do have a good start. Much better than a few days ago.
ginger
I have learnt a motza from Scott Kelbbys CS2 book. Just follow the bouncing ball & it all happens in front of you. I love it.
Also i think you & harry would compliment each others shooting styles. If i had the opportunity to shoot beside him i would be there in a second.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Well, there is more to say on that. I was actually thinking, after Rutt said the Zion trip and Andy posted that there was room, that perhaps............
I do think Andy likes me, we have clashed, but there is a history, he did like me, he didn't like me, he is trying very hard, and I really do think he likes me.
Now this is important. One, I am profoundly hard of hearing. That means that if I stand at the front of the pack, can see the person's lips, I can hear about 50% of what they say. If none of that is true, well I just wander off on my own. If it is true, the teacher wonders why I didn't get it all, and I have to ask stupid questions.
And there is the fact that if it is not tangible, I don't like to spend money on it. I would love to go on both of those trips, for free. But at the price of a lens, and at the expense of a lens, I am still thinking.
But I don't think any of you realize how frustrating it is to teach/deal with/be around the hard of hearing. Particularly the profoundly hard of hearing. It is frustrating on both sides. At least the hard of hearing person is used to it, to the hearing person it usually comes as a complete surprise that with the strongest aids possible, this person is not understanding simple "English".
___________________________
I am getting some prices together with my info, both to buy and to sell, possibly. Right now, I am doing that.
_______________
Binghott, I did ignore your comment in that I did not respond to it. I am sorry. There was a point at which I thought that lens was essential for me to own. It was back ordered everywhere. It is in at B&H right now, and it is on my wish list, so I can access the info on it easily. But I have learned that I have had no time when I thought, oh, if I only had that lens. My 17-40 filled in just wonderfully there. It is my church portrait lens.
I have not ruled it out, but neither is it particularly high in priorities. I love long, I love short, but I don't seem to love normal. Smile.
_________________________
Rutt, someone, mentioned the coveted 10-22, I just put it on my wish list for access. As just a thought...........not a heavy priority, but I would get it over a normal lens.
____________________________
Gus, I have more books than you could think of! I have Kelby's book, the CS2, I Have other CS2 books, I have the book on RAW and the bridge.........I am a book person, and I have found that a large price in upgrading photoshop is having to get a few books on it, and that grows.
_____________________________
I also have about 5 books on Nature Photography. (One of them told me about the 400mm lens over the 300mm lens that I used to own.)
I have the two Margulis books.
___________________
On my own, w/o mentioning it, I am wondering about the wisdom of trading up to a f2.8 (without IS) in the 70-200. It might make that lens more usable.
____________-
All these are possibilities. Of course, I would like to put all my money in lenses (resale in an emergency), but there are some other things........and I have not fit most of them in yet.
________________
Just right now, I am making a list, again. Then I will start crossing things out. When I get a total list of "wants", then I will go to tossing things out.
On the books and things like that, I will say that I can usually squeeze that money out during the yr. Big ticket items are beyond my reach during the year.
ginger
Ginger! We all love
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Ginger, Harry doesn't like anybody. He's a crotchety old curmudgeon. Ignore Harry.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
Here I was drinking my morning coffee quite content. Then I read your post..............now I am very upset. That damn Harry doesn't like me ether! Why, he hasn't so much as sent a Christmas, or birthday card!
I am so sad, bewildered, and confused. I am leaving, I will go eat worms. :cry :cry :cry
Sam
Thanks, Andy!
Thanks, David, Sam!
I would eat worms, but right now I have no taste buds, actually might be the best time to do it!
ginger
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
I DO Ginger!! We are actually in a fairly similar situation. I am deaf in the left ear and have a profound loss in the right. I wear an aid in the right ear which gives me volume but NOT the subtle little differences that make it words instead of noise. I need lip reading for that and some are so easy to read that they say they forget my hearing loss; others are very hard to read even in a one on one conversation. Isn’t Closed Captioning a God send for TV and tapes? I use a TTY/TDD in combination with the Illinois State Relay Service for VCO phone calls so I can voice rather than type my end of the conversation.
Other things include: I think we are both in our 60's — didn’t you say you are 66 in another post? I am 63. We both have to watch our budget although there are differences partly because I am single and if I decide to save it that is where it goes. We both shoot in our church — I am editor of our newsletter and shoot events for that.
We do have different gear though. I finally got a used D60 (with grip) in August and then had health problems followed by a very expensive replacement of the furnace and central air conditioning in my house. So, have not really added to what I had from film days when I was shooting with a Canon EOS 620. Thankfully my best lens, a 28-70 F3.5-4.5 Mk I, is a range that works well for most of what I want to shoot. As expected, there are times when I wish for something wider. After seeing what some have posted from the "Kit" lens I have been wondering about getting one of those and having it modified for the older body. But, am trying to also find out how much more, if any, I would have to put out to get something better by any mfg. Please see this thread http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=232472#post232472
Jane