Wanted: Devil's advocate....

Well, just to show you what I'd like to do..... (big files)

...am using a 300D and I rather spend on the optics than on the 20D.....(not yet)

http://img.photobucket​.com …1AsianWakeboard​04-344.jpg

http://img.photobucket​.com …58/Snoopy88/0IM​G_2351.jpg

http://img.photobucket​.com …58/Snoopy88/0IM​G_1925.jpg

http://img.photobucket​.com …58/Snoopy88/0IM​G_2331.jpg

http://img.photobucket​.com …1AsianWakeboard​04-288.jpg

Wished that I can do better and i think that the fine lines were spoilted due to my handshake....

Dun like tripod much , and I have a Manfotto monopod also....

Use PS to crop....well, that is possible. I am from the old school of film users, where cropping is an expensive option in the darkroom and are frown upon. You make every shot counts coz film is limited on site......... At least that is my self-imposed standards....

Just saw the 28-135 IS on the pre-own market .....wondering if it is also worthwhile target to eye on....then I will go on 2 meals of oats + milk daily till my bank accounts recovers....

Correct my poor english here,

but I tot devil advocates are supposed to

gun down the idea of getting the lens ?

Andythaler wrote:
You've asked the question in the wrong place ...

You'll only find devilish lens advocates here...

Best regards,
Andy

The catch is NO IS or it's equal.... it makes a big difference when our 300D is doing 1.6X....

And I dun want to handle a tripod, mono is as far as it goes.....

The catch on the Sigma 50-500mm? Mmm... well the optics aren't bad but they aren't as good as the 100-400L... no IS, and the autofocus is not as quick. It is a superb bargain in terms of price though.

As to the comment about the 100-400L sucking dust (I haven't seen it do that by the way)... well I guess that's down to the fact that it changes length to zoom, precisely the same way that the Sigma 50-500mm does... so where's the difference there?

You compared a different pair of lenses than I did then. The two I compared were so close it was hard to tell the difference and at longer focal lengths the Sigma may have been slightly sharper. I was using a loupe on film with a limited number of shots but my conclusion was that as far as useful photos they were almost the same.

Remember, this thread asked for a devil's advocate. All I've seen are a bunch of "me too" replies from people with big L's in their eyes, or maybe a big L in one eye and big $ in the other.

What? He has money and still thinking about that lens?

I'm thinking if I shoudl overdraw another CC to get my next lens....

Do appreciate this note.....

I hoped to hear more from those who would persuade me otherwise....

Hey, pssst, listen up..... you only live once.... you just gotta have fun before it's too late.... so get it! Do you want to have a nice toy to play with or do you just want to stare at a number on a piece of paper (your bank statement....)

Hahhhaa....this is neuturally very good....

there goes the downpayment for my apartment next year....

Jesper wrote:
Hey, pssst, listen up..... you only live once.... you just gotta have fun before it's too late.... so get it! Do you want to have a nice toy to play with or do you just want to stare at a number on a piece of paper (your bank statement....)

lensmen wrote:
Hahhhaa....this is neuturally very good....

there goes the downpayment for my apartment next year....

Jesper wrote:
Hey, pssst, listen up..... you only live once.... you just gotta have fun before it's too late.... so get it! Do you want to have a nice toy to play with or do you just want to stare at a number on a piece of paper (your bank statement....)

You cant take pictures with an apartment though!!!

Get the 100-400mm IS <== devils


I have owned and used the Sigma 50-500mm extensively. I had a VERY GOOD copy of that lens and it was muy "main lens" for the better part of a year before it was replaced with a 500mm Prime.

I highly recomned this lens to those looking for 500mm at an affordable price...

But it is no Canon 100-400mm IS!

Put simply,. I don't own the 50-500mm anymore,. and I DO have a 100-400mm IS.


As for action and focus speed,... Scottes is correct that the 100-400mm focus tracking is not as fast as some other lenses.. but I woul like to point out the lenses tracking limitations seem to be isolated to very small subjects (like birds in flight)

I have not felt the 100-400mm is too slow to focus on moving objects of much larger size. (like people or cars)

Gosh...I think I will have to discharge the devil's advocate for failing to perform it's duty.... seems that the opposing attonery had the final say.....

yup, the 50-500 Bigma was the next choice, but for the sake of IS & possibly my dream "L" lens that I had been drolling since my school days of the Canon F-1 and the FD-L lenses, guess it is about time I make this dream comes true....

thanks to all for their feedback and comments, I really enjoyed it.

Nope, this topic is NOT closed yet, until the lens reached my hands in exchange for a lighter wallet.....

cheers

Just as well it isn't closed - I ordered one yesterday!

Let me think, reasons not to buy it: <blank> oh alright, price.

reasons to buy it: versatility, quality, weight, IS, size, colour etc...

I had toyed with the idea of a 35-350 but decided I needed the IS, and besides I can always get another L to fill the hole between 16-35L and the 100-400L


can you tell I don't have children?

:P

Well, I also would like to tell you that I am still single and available....



Such is the freedom of choice that we have.....

gosh I am at a loss of what to do.........

That does it..... end of discussion for me on this lens....

I can feel the smooth & round body of the white lens barrel ,

with the envy of those near me

blinking an eye of respect,

that I have the ultimate tool on hand.
Ouhhhh...... it is pure orgasim of the image kind....

Soon, she will be mine.... muahahahahaa/.....