Da lensa which keptcha on da Edga

hmm... looks like i have to correct my earlier post about the 300 2.8.....

guess its the 500 F4 now

Oh heck no...no no no. If you're doing wildlife, ok. If you're doing football or other sports, the 300 2.8 LIS takes the cake.

Ronald S. Jr. wrote in post #2008574
Oh heck no...no no no. If you're doing wildlife, ok. If you're doing football or other sports, the 300 2.8 LIS takes the cake.

look in my sigg KAY.

i want the 500 for wildlife. goodness havnt u been in the 300 rant thread today yet?

Billginthekeys wrote in post #2008588
look in my sigg KAY.

i want the 500 for wildlife. goodness havnt u been in the 300 rant thread today yet?

Well Billy, looks like you have fallen off that edge in a most favourable way.....ordered the 300 f/2.8 (Canon ?).....how long have you been seriously contemplating buying that lens (please do not say " a week" .)

Ronald S. Jr. wrote in post #2008574
Oh heck no...no no no. If you're doing wildlife, ok. If you're doing football or other sports, the 300 2.8 LIS takes the cake.

Ron, you need to find some other boys to play with. These rich kids are just giving you ideas and probably causing you needless stress.

lensview wrote in post #2008615
Well Billy, looks like you have fallen off that edge in a most favourable way.....ordered the 300 f/2.8 (Canon ?).....how long have you been seriously contemplating buying that lens (please do not say " a week" .)

Yes the canon. Ive been seriously contemplating it for like... a month. Once i started shooting sports i knew for sure. Other than that the 500 has always been my dream wildlife lens. but that is now WAY in the future. gotta pay off this baby first. I should have my new setup (1d and 300) together and shooting by this weekend.

Billginthekeys wrote in post #2008588
look in my sigg KAY.

i want the 500 for wildlife. goodness havnt u been in the 300 rant thread today yet?

My mistake. That quote in my previous post clearly leads to the assumption that you were considering ditching the 300 for the 500.

lensview wrote in post #2008625
Ron, you need to find some other boys to play with. These rich kids are just giving you ideas and probably causing you needless stress.

Oh heck, no worries. If I wanted the 300 that bad, I'd have it already. Not to sound conceited, but does it look like I've been shorting myself on gear? I don't need the 300. I considered it for my theater work, but it would simply be a bit too long. The IQ is grand, yes, but what's the point if it's not the right length? 70-200L IS and a slight crop fits me much better. After all, with 13mp, I can withstand a small crop.

Ronald S. Jr. wrote in post #2008655
Oh heck, no worries. If I wanted the 300 that bad, I'd have it already. Not to sound conceited, but does it look like I've been shorting myself on gear?

Oh, I do not worry about you.....when I was your age I'd get a couple of cameras every summer break away from college......disposabl​e cameras, that is.

Sigma 10-20

17mm isn't wide enough

2x teleconverter is also on the list, but not a lens really...

the 85 1.2 - The budget. i figure the lens will cost me about $2,000, the divorce will cost me another $10,00 for the attorney and then 1/2 of everthing I own now and in the future. I guess I'll have to stick with the 85 1.8 =0(

Double Negative wrote in post #2007987
For me right now, there's two lenses that I desire much:

- EF 35mm f/1.4L
- EF 400mm f/2.8L IS

One down...

Sadly, the other will be quite a ways away.

It's the Sigma 100-300 mm f/4 for me... I do not have need for a telephoto that often, but I hear that this is one helluva lens. That, and my SO says that I don't need it.

Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM, with a black 1.4x in the back.
As the EF 1.4x is not a real lens, I want that too.

All three T&S lenses, I was doing well resisting temptation till I actually got to play with them last week now I know that it is inevitable......