For SERIOUS L Collectors' Eyes Only !

Speaking of L's, I should have my first one around Monday or so, the 70-200 F4L. .

I'm thinking of picking up another nifty fifty, but this time used so I don't pay henry's high cost. Hopefully I'll get a better more focusa ccurate copy. I just want to have it in my bag because the 50 is an important lens without doubt (it's like a standard prime pretty much), and I want something to do portraits on the rare occasion I do one at school or something.

Henry's was $120 CAD + TAX and the Sigma DG UV filter was $34. Hopefully I can get one used for around $60-70 CAD.

basroil wrote in post #2134039
oh great carnak the magnificent, how about you give your mkII to your daughter (one's in highschool right?)?

Finally the correct homage is paid to me. Thank you, basroil, You may rise from your genuflected position now, all.

Now, are you referring to my 85L? That is only a I, not a II.

Or are you speaking of my 1DsMKII?

I have one son in college who is continually bleeding me like a leech, and two daughters in H.S., one a sophomore who loves to engage in sophomoric hijinx, and the other a senior who is looking toward the next four years at the University of Arizona.

Sheesh, no wonder I don't have the 300 f2.8 yet. Although, maybe it's because I just spent over two grand tonight on new speakers for my home theater.

But don't you worry, I've been using my grinding wheel to keep my camera Spic&Span.

Carnak the Marknificent.

MARK!!! I just saw it!

However did you convince anyone to do that??

I LOVE IT....it so fits your insanity!

I had absolutely nothing to do with it, though I am honored. I think.

Carnak

I think one or more of the moderators have a very funny sense of humor! This isn't the first change that's happened mysteriously...

I was going to say "let the dog lick it." Apparently, on a t.v. talk show here in the US, a celebrity said she lets her dogs lick the diaper rash on her babies because a doctor told her the saliva had natural curing powers. Gross! Anyway, I thought maybe it may have natural cleaning powers as well.

Suzy, I think that's even more gross than Condyk's maggot idea...

SuzyView wrote in post #2134603
I was going to say "let the dog lick it." Apparently, on a t.v. talk show here in the US, a celebrity said she lets her dogs lick the diaper rash on her babies because a doctor told her the saliva had natural curing powers. Gross! Anyway, I thought maybe it may have natural cleaning powers as well.

Luckily she was only visiting her proctologyst, not the OBGYN

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #2134295
I let my Dogs lick them clean.. works great!

IMG NOTICE: [NOT AN IMAGE URL, NOT RENDERED INLINE]

Yeah, you hardly ever see smudges on a dog's b*lls

Where's this thread possibly going is where I want to know. Soon we'll be talking about the reproductive organs and the way dogs have birth aren't we?

... (incase you didn't realise, I'm kidding, or so I hope.)

Petkal wrote in post #2134173
Yeah, we might have lost Kepler.

Thank God Klepper is still here though!

MDJAK wrote in post #2134015
And they say I'm a few plates short of a picnic.

mark

Nothing worse than a picnic and not enough plates.

Doc, I was worried about Mark but he seems to have rebounded w/this Carnak business...

...you, I'm REALLY worried about....maybe you should buy a lens or something...

Permagrin wrote in post #2135310
Doc, I was worried about Mark but he seems to have rebounded w/this Carnak business...

...you, I'm REALLY worried about....maybe you should buy a lens or something...

I know. I have nothing very long, and that might be the issue. Wonder about 600mm?

rklepper wrote in post #2135271
Thank God Klepper is still here though!

Doc, you are gettin' decidedly better with age, like a good wine.