Pathfinder is a bad influence
fish
Registered Users Posts: 2,950 Major grins
Damn you, Pathfinder. You influenced me to buy some more glass today.
Tamron Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di
Tamron Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di
"Consulting the rules of composition before taking a photograph, is like consulting the laws of gravity before going for a walk." - Edward Weston
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."-Hunter S.Thompson
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."-Hunter S.Thompson
0
Comments
Tamron also has a 16-35f2.8 Di and a 200-500 Di zoom to consider as well - just something to think about......... Let me know how they work out for you too................. Like you I have a 17-40 Canon so I will probably pass on the 16-35 for now.
Think how much money we have saved with digital photography - Hah! I could have shot film for the REST OF MY LIFE and not spent anywhere near as much money as I have on Canon goodies in the last 9 months. But I never was able to create and control my images the way I can now with digital images and Photoshop. What fun...... Enjoy your new lens.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
So far, I'm diggin' the Tamron. Fast, light, feels good...feels WAY better than the 24-85. Fortunately, it uses the same filter size - 67mm. I just couldn't justify spending 4x the money on the Canon 24-70/2.8.
No problem on the WA. 200-500 zoom, huh? How are the ratings? Guess I need to check it out. I was thinking of getting a long prime, but zooms are just so damn convenient.
I dunno. Certainly the initial cost of the hardware is pricey. But think of all the chemicals and paper you aren't buying. I distinctly remember turning on the light in the darkroom and getting ready to scream as I looked at a dozen 8x10 prints hanging up and all of them were just slightly out of focus. I must have spent a few hours on them. I figure I'll be way ahead of the game (if I can limit my future glass expenditures) shortly. I've already shot 2650 images with the 10D.
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."-Hunter S.Thompson
you found them!
I am thinking about hitting Russian Ridge this weekend for some flowers.
Ian
janet's fountain. her nipple wasn't turned on. :lol
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."-Hunter S.Thompson
I bought some [very] cheap glass this week too:
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/html/pages/28_80.htm
test shot:
I don't like the how the "not in focus" parts of the photo look - rather than soft, they look "doubled"... does that make sense? But for a $60 lens (w/shipping - ebay!) it actually feels pretty sturdy - much more so than my EF-S lens that came with the Rebel. Finish is nice, even has a focus scale - something NONE of my 3 Canon lenses have. I bought it for a pretty specific purpose. I'm doing some experimental work in my lab and I needed that extra macro feature - the quality isn't a big deal as I'll be shooting at ISO 400 for speed anyway...
(this is NOT with the new lens yet... i'll be able to get closer to the sheet of liquid where the jets intersect)
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."-Hunter S.Thompson
I love the colors in that shot, but I find the orange on the rocks behind the flowers to distract me; I don't know which one to look at. I think if I were doing it I'd have tried to take two different shots; one of the flowers with as much of the orange on the rocks out of frame, and another of the top of the rocks with the sprig of grass in frame somewhere. The orange on the rocks is really cool looking.
Speaking of glass, if I hadn't had a great deal on a 28-70 f/2.8 USM L (thanks Charles!) I probably would have been looking at the same lens. I shot a lot of nice pictures with crappy Craig (?) lenses on my old Minolta, and bad as they were they were nowhere near as bad as the lens on my C2500L -- which I've also shot some nice stuff with. Mostly I figure equipment is what you make of it; it can be great fun to pull neat shots out of what a lot of people would consider to be crap equipment.
jimf@frostbytes.com
I might have to go back and take a different perspective shot.
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."-Hunter S.Thompson
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."-Hunter S.Thompson
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."-Hunter S.Thompson