Oh, Dante/Petkal, Shhh: 50 f1.2

It's looks nice -perhaps more usable at 1.2 than the 1.4 is at 1.4?- So hard to tell though without someone being able to really run it through the ringer. MD's right though, it boils down to the pocketbook!

Dante King wrote in post #2211227
looks real nice mark. So you tried the 300 AGAIN and did not take one home? Wanna trade a 1dsmk2 for a 300 2.8?

Then I wouldn't have a body to use it with.
Is there a "scratch-your-head" emoticon?

And I couldn't take it home, you cook (or is that kook?) 'cause they don't sell them at the show, and B&H is three blocks away.

me

freefallu wrote in post #2210986
Thanks for sharing its a nice capture , as you say maybe a higher ISO would have given a better idea , but if you were fairly stable taking the pic i dont see anything in it that id pay 10 times the price of my 1.4 for..

Thanks.

Now, I've never claimed to be a mathematical genius (in fact, when it comes to math the Dolt moniker fits me like O.J.'s glove) but ten times the price? It's actually about three times the price. But, who's counting.

me

MDJAK wrote in post #2211667
Then I wouldn't have a body to use it with.
Is there a "scratch-your-head" emoticon?

And I couldn't take it home, you cook (or is that kook?) 'cause they don't sell them at the show, and B&H is three blocks away.

me

In this case, not only they are both are allowed, they are actually recommended.

I'm going back to the show tomorrow. I'll do better, I promise.:o

me

Hey, Pet, know whose smiling face is shining from my avatar?

MDJAK wrote in post #2211697
Hey, Pet, know whose smiling face is shining from my avatar?

Dolton Leach 40 years ago ? Dr.Klepper today ? Ed Rather ? Babe Ruth ?
No idea ?

So would you have traded it for your 24-70?

Nice shot, btw.

Petkal wrote in post #2211731
Dolton Leach 40 years ago ? Dr.Klepper today ? Ed Rather ? Babe Ruth ?
No idea ?

YOu're kidding, right? One of the 20th Century's most famous comedians, now deceased, and you don't know who he is? I'm disappointed in you.

Grego,

You mean would I have traded my 24-70 for the 50mm? No way, no how.

Now that you've got me thinking about it, and money/value aside, the only trade I'd consider would be my 100 macro, or maybe, maybe the 70-300 DO.

me

MDJAK wrote in post #2211760
Grego,

You mean would I have traded my 24-70 for the 50mm? No way, no how.

Now that you've got me thinking about it, and money/value aside, the only trade I'd consider would be my 100 macro, or maybe, maybe the 70-300 DO.

me

Ooh, i was just joking about the fact that you could have traded one lens for another since you left your 24-70 right in front of the guy. ;p

Good thing it was still there when you went to return the lens.

MDJAK wrote in post #2211760
YOu're kidding, right? One of the 20th Century's most famous comedians, now deceased, and you don't know who he is? I'm disappointed in you.

Jerry Mason, Don Rickles, Benny Hill, Ralph Nader ? I give up. Tell me....

can we get a better picture... is it alan king, John Larroquette?

OH! Buddy Hackett...............

BUDDY HACKETT.... ok, what do i win?

MDJAK wrote in post #2211681
Thanks.

Now, I've never claimed to be a mathematical genius (in fact, when it comes to math the Dolt moniker fits me like O.J.'s glove) but ten times the price? It's actually about three times the price. But, who's counting.

me

Ok , yes maybe i did over exxagerate . Do you think its worth it ?

freefallu wrote in post #2212964
Ok , yes maybe i did over exxagerate . Do you think its worth it ?

Just to let you know, you are asking that question of a feller who bought 1DsMkII (Digic I version) barely weeks after the cameras were introduced ? OOOOOhhhh $$$$$$$.