Difficult Decision Story

Tareq wrote in post #2031224
lol twistedP, really i think of that alot, but here i didn't find even my children interested in photography, and i am not running after kids to learn them.

Anyway, i have zooms good enough already and i think of primes only now. and YES, i want to keep Canon line only.

Tareq.
You would not catch them if you ran after them! kids can run very fast.
Start a photography club and they would run after you.
There are so many amzing things to take images of in the UAE.
Do you have any photography clubs in your area?

Tareq,

i know i mentioned this in another thread but i will post it again (please don't take this the wrong way). it does seem like you are buying just for the sake of buying at this point. you say you are dreaming about FF. do you need FF? you say you need the 400 2.8 for sports, have you ever held that lens or did you shoot any sports events and found that you need this beast of a lens? you ordered the 1DmkIIn and you haven't even received it and yet you are already looking at a new body. owning the entire canon line up is not that difficult to do (all you need is money). however, the trick is to own what you need and use what you own. buying the best is fine and all but it will NOT make your images better no matter what you think. some of the best photographer on this board are actually using the 300D and 10D. Lorek for example takes the best gloumer shots i have seen so far and untill recenetly, he was using a 10D and a $200 lens. can you please tell me the reasoning behind wanting each one of the lenses you have on the list? again, not trying to be rude, i respect you and after all, it is your money. i just don't want you to spend $20,000 thinking that because you have the best gears, great images are just going to be created by themselves. i was just like you and i too wanted to buy every single L lens made until i realized a few things on my own:

1) if the lens is too big or heavy, i will not use it so no point in buying it.
2) nobody really cares about my signeture on a photograhy forum, people care about the final image that i showed them.
3) a $100 lens is WAY better than a $90000 lens if you use it and don't use the more expensive one.
4) you can have a 1DsmkIIIIIII AND A $50000 lens but if you don't understand exposure and composititon, your images will still look worse than a 300D in the hands of a person that understands the basics.
5) very few people do all kinds of photography so buying all lenses really doesn't make sense.

6) starting 10000 threads about lenses are bodies is less productive than starting 20 threads with images askig for critique and tips (for me it was at least).

7) improving my composition and technical skills was a lot cheaper and more beneficial than buying another L lens.

A great post Snir, and I agree with your sentiments 100%. That said, I fear that there is no stopping Tareq anymore, since I think he has a mighty fierce case of gear-itis. So, I figure, if I can't help him, I may as well cheer him on his his quest to own 'em all.

twisted pixels wrote in post #2031339
Tareq.
You would not catch them if you ran after them! kids can run very fast.
Start a photography club and they would run after you.
There are so many amzing things to take images of in the UAE.
Do you have any photography clubs in your area?

yes we have one photography club opened new recently and i am a member there.

Ed Hamilton wrote in post #2031305
Tareq, What purpose is the 500mm going to serve? I mean, how are YOU going to use it? That’s a $5,000 plus lens. I have to admit I like, but to be truthful for my photographic needs it would be a waste. So, what kind of photography are you going to do with that lens?

you are right. but let me ask this question: what is that 500 used for?

Tareq wrote in post #2031237
WOW, you're reading my mind perfectly.
in fact i am thinking of 500 and 135 alot, then 50L or 85L, but 400 f2.8 just i will buy if possible for sports and i don't think i can handle that heavy lens even on tripod/monopod to shoot most wildlife for example.
but still you forgot that even i am going to buy lenses, i am thinking alot of that new FF.

Just a wild guess, Tareq.
Can you wait a few months with the FF camera body ?
I am sure there will be all kinds of 1DsMkII's on the market soon, priced very attractively. Also, the 5D is gonna come down to $2300 or so real soon.

Tareq wrote in post #2031416
you are right. but let me ask this question: what is that 500 used for?

You're pulling our legs, right? I can't imagine anyone dropping that sort of cash on a lens that they have no use for...

blonde wrote in post #2031347
Tareq,

i know i mentioned this in another thread but i will post it again (please don't take this the wrong way). it does seem like you are buying just for the sake of buying at this point. you say you are dreaming about FF. do you need FF? you say you need the 400 2.8 for sports, have you ever held that lens or did you shoot any sports events and found that you need this beast of a lens? you ordered the 1DmkIIn and you haven't even received it and yet you are already looking at a new body. owning the entire canon line up is not that difficult to do (all you need is money). however, the trick is to own what you need and use what you own. buying the best is fine and all but it will NOT make your images better no matter what you think. some of the best photographer on this board are actually using the 300D and 10D. Lorek for example takes the best gloumer shots i have seen so far and untill recenetly, he was using a 10D and a $200 lens. can you please tell me the reasoning behind wanting each one of the lenses you have on the list? again, not trying to be rude, i respect you and after all, it is your money. i just don't want you to spend $20,000 thinking that because you have the best gears, great images are just going to be created by themselves. i was just like you and i too wanted to buy every single L lens made until i realized a few things on my own:

1) if the lens is too big or heavy, i will not use it so no point in buying it.
2) nobody really cares about my signeture on a photograhy forum, people care about the final image that i showed them.
3) a $100 lens is WAY better than a $90000 lens if you use it and don't use the more expensive one.
4) you can have a 1DsmkIIIIIII AND A $50000 lens but if you don't understand exposure and composititon, your images will still look worse than a 300D in the hands of a person that understands the basics.
5) very few people do all kinds of photography so buying all lenses really doesn't make sense.

6) starting 10000 threads about lenses are bodies is less productive than starting 20 threads with images askig for critique and tips (for me it was at least).

7) improving my composition and technical skills was a lot cheaper and more beneficial than buying another L lens.

I think i answered that question before.
all gears i can use on the time, and you believe that you will buy something when u need it, maybe not today but for sure tomorrow, and how can you know that you don't need any gear if you didn't try or you haven't it to use. for example how can i do alot of photography of wildlife or sports just with 50 1.4 or 24-70L?
it is like saying no need to fly by plane to go all over the world, just one bicycle can do alot for you or any cheap car will do the job.
someone told me that he met some professionals and they told him that it is ridiculous to use one or 2 lenses for everything even they shoot one type of photography, for example someone just photo portraits and he own about lenses for that only, is that logic? then what if someone who will shoot everything? i know one or few lenses can do alot, but each lens has it performance and each can be useful in some situations. I think you read alot of people looking for fast lenses or that is great for low light, then why not keep 50 f1.0 for all shots because it is ultimate lens.
it is 2 things, i spend alot of money just to get what i want and dream just to satisfy my desires and second to use all what buy on time doesn't matter if i use one lens one time or 1000000 times.
in addition, i got great photos from my 50 1.8 and 85 1.8, does that mean i don't need to get anymore lenses?
I appreciate your reply and i agree with you.

SimonG wrote in post #2031468


You're pulling our legs, right? I can't imagine anyone dropping that sort of cash on a lens that they have no use for...

and who said that it will not be used?
when i got my 70-200L i thought i will not use it as it is super lens, but i took around 10k with that lens in about 3 months maybe. when i got 100-400 it is on my 30D all the time and i still keep taking photos with it daily beside 16-35L.
any lens i buy will be used on the time, and i am sure most 500 owner don't use it forever.

lensview wrote in post #2031420
Just a wild guess, Tareq.
Can you wait a few months with the FF camera body ?
I am sure there will be all kinds of 1DsMkII's on the market soon, priced very attractively. Also, the 5D is gonna come down to $2300 or so real soon.

i am planning to buy FF at the end of this year maybe, if not then in February next year, i think that is enough time to see what is new there.

Tareq wrote in post #2031490
... and i am sure most 500 owner don't use it forever.

I really doubt that... I would wager that most people who own this lens (mainly birders / wildlife shooters I would imagine) keep this lens on their camera a good amount of the time. Even rich photographers do not just drop $5k on a lens to have it sit in the closet (well, most of them don't...). In fact, the only reason I can see for them to stop using it is if they happen to buy something longer.

Tareq wrote in post #2031473
I think i answered that question before.
all gears i can use on the time, and you believe that you will buy something when u need it, maybe not today but for sure tomorrow, and how can you know that you don't need any gear if you didn't try or you haven't it to use. for example how can i do alot of photography of wildlife or sports just with 50 1.4 or 24-70L?
it is like saying no need to fly by plane to go all over the world, just one bicycle can do alot for you or any cheap car will do the job.
someone told me that he met some professionals and they told him that it is ridiculous to use one or 2 lenses for everything even they shoot one type of photography, for example someone just photo portraits and he own about lenses for that only, is that logic? then what if someone who will shoot everything? i know one or few lenses can do alot, but each lens has it performance and each can be useful in some situations. I think you read alot of people looking for fast lenses or that is great for low light, then why not keep 50 f1.0 for all shots because it is ultimate lens.
it is 2 things, i spend alot of money just to get what i want and dream just to satisfy my desires and second to use all what buy on time doesn't matter if i use one lens one time or 1000000 times.
in addition, i got great photos from my 50 1.8 and 85 1.8, does that mean i don't need to get anymore lenses?
I appreciate your reply and i agree with you.

since it seems like you misunderstood my post completely, i will try again

1) you own the 100-400, what did it fail to do for you that you feel like a 400 2.8 can do better?

2) you own the 50 1.4, what do you think you will get from the .2 difference?

3) you own the 85 1.8, what do you think you will gain from the .6 difference?

4) what can't your 70-200 2.8 IS do that the 135 2.0 can?

i never said that you should only own 1 or 2 lenses. i said that you should own lenses that you need and not lenses that will look great in the signenture line. and again i ask you, why did you decide on the 400 2.8 lens? the lenses that you are talking about on your lins are specialized lenses and are tailored for very specific shooting situtations. there is a reason why you don't see many amatures buying the 400 2.8..

I can change my mind to buy glasses as i don't think i can afford 500 very soon but when i get 1Dmk2N soon coming and buy let's say 135L or even 50L then i can forget about those long pricy primes, and i wait my dad to give me some money so then i can buy 300 f4 or even 400 f5.6 because i know that i saved my money for better fast lenses and if i have to pay by my money saved only then i will think of fast lenses only.
All what i can say is that i am not in hurry, i am still using most of my currnent lenses in different occasions and situations and that doesn't affect of what i think to buy more later, all will be under usage time to time.

This thread leaves my head spinning... wowzers.

blonde wrote in post #2031523
since it seems like you misunderstood my post completely, i will try again

1) you own the 100-400, what did it fail to do for you that you feel like a 400 2.8 can do better?
I am not sure that i will buy this 400 f2.8 for sure, but if i have that money with no problem then why not? but it is out of buying for about 2 years, but the only thing coming in the mind is that i am moving to get place into sports photography in field or clubs so then i think i will think of that lens alot, but don't worry, it is still in wishlist.

2) you own the 50 1.4, what do you think you will get from the .2 difference?
I will see when that 50L coming if those who own 3 50's will not think of it.
It is in my future buying list, not necesary i will buy it today or tomorrow, maybe i will never buy it, but again, if money issue is not a problem then this is no worry to add it sooner or later.


3) you own the 85 1.8, what do you think you will gain from the .6 difference?
My friend asked me to open a studio and sharing work, and he met alot of pro photographers, he told me most of them use 85L in studios, so i can think that maybe this lens will be better than 85 1.8 copy, but i think if i plan to buy 50L then this 85L is not necesary, otherwise i have to tell that friend about your opinion.


4) what can't your 70-200 2.8 IS do that the 135 2.0 can?
Primes always win in sharpness and fast competition, and that 135L is not expensive to say OH GOD $$$$. I like primes anyway.


i never said that you should only own 1 or 2 lenses. i said that you should own lenses that you need and not lenses that will look great in the signenture line. and again i ask you, why did you decide on the 400 2.8 lens? the lenses that you are talking about on your lins are specialized lenses and are tailored for very specific shooting situtations. there is a reason why you don't see many amatures buying the 400 2.8..

400 2.8 will be for pro usage sports only, so if i don't go for pro sports then this lens is wasting money.