It's 2am: 26th Edition... Crazy Shizz My Roger Says...

DTBaan wrote in post #14159326
nope. i need the whole lot.

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …150&N=0&Initial​Search=yes

total is about $1,400.00

oh thats right its a completely different filter

DTBaan wrote in post #14159326
nope. i need the whole lot.

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …150&N=0&Initial​Search=yes
WOW! the ring adapter alone is $400?!
total is about $1,400.00

MOkoFOko wrote in post #14159327
Spending thousands of dollars in cash is a bad idea. Surely she has to realize that.

I don't know to be honest.. I have asked her and she just gets mad lol.

jdizzle wrote in post #14159345
You're going to Japan, remember?

Yes, to spy and peep on girls. Nothing more.

*sigh* wrote in post #14159331
No not really... I don't really need IS on a 17-40... I don't have shaky hands.

Oh and there are no AF issues with the Sigma 50 if you get a good copy.

Well, good luck with that although I owned one and had focus issues, the IQ was amazing from the 50. It was really sharp at 1.4 too... When it was in focus.

MOkoFOko wrote in post #14159349
I wouldn't mind it if they added it. 18-55 IS is pretty nice to use

Well it would never hurt, but it's not really necessary all the time. Like with my 28 1.8 generally my shutter speeds have to be a bit higher to deal with getting rid of motion blur to the point where there are no issues hand holding at all.

laxlife1234 wrote in post #14159358
I don't know to be honest.. I have asked her and she just gets mad lol.

I got a CC before I turned 18--they sent me offers in the mail

iluxa007 wrote in post #14159362
Well, good luck with that although I owned one and had focus issues, the IQ was amazing from the 50. It was really sharp at 1.4 too... When it was in focus.

It's not hard to find a copy that focuses, sometimes you have to go through a couple, but you can find them easy enough.

*sigh* wrote in post #14159331
No not really... I don't really need IS on a 17-40... I don't have shaky hands.

Oh and there are no AF issues with the Sigma 50 if you get a good copy.

Yep, I hand hold the 17-40 all the time, even in low light like this one, it was hand held

SUB1IM388 wrote in post #14159245
NO! 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 combo the HEBREW trinity!

That's what I plan on doing.

DTBaan wrote in post #14159267
id do 14-24. but itll cost more and ill need a whole new set of filters

The 14-24 is great but, it's really costly. The 16-35 should be fine.

Fricks wrote in post #14159276
trust julian. you need the 14-24. you would only need an adapter ring.

I don't mind promoting a lens like the 14-24 but, it's not cheap when adding the filter holder and filters on top of it.

laxlife1234 wrote in post #14159358
I don't know to be honest.. I have asked her and she just gets mad lol.

Tell her that being a grandparent whilst you're still in h.s. would be more expensive.

MOkoFOko wrote in post #14159311
Not for long though. You're sounding mighty red, comrade (and by that, I mean Nikon)

for budgeting. canon wins i can get a body + a nice lens for the price of the d800

L.J.G. wrote in post #14159271
17-40 is a terrible lens

Beautiful set Lloyd!

DTBaan wrote in post #14159377
for budgeting. canon wins i can get a body + a nice lens for the price of the d800

You can also get the D800 + 50 1.4G for the price of a 5D3

Chet wrote in post #14159376
Tell her that being a grandparent whilst you're still in h.s. would be more expensive.

:o

How'd you know?!

Chet wrote in post #14159376
Tell her that being a grandparent whilst you're still in h.s. would be more expensive.

You're not very good at "connect the dots", I take it? How does one go from "I need a credit card" to "otherwise I'm banging all the chicks I can find"