A&P well i finally got my lens

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by Specialist23, Jan 5, 2006.

  1. Specialist23

    Specialist23 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    29,598
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    minnesota
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0002Y5WXO/ref=ord_cart_shr/103-2357603-1245407?%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance&n=502394

    I know that it's not the greatest and that perhaps the tamron 28-75 is much better, but i really need the IS. i also really wanted this one,
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00009R6WT/ref=ord_cart_shr/103-2357603-1245407?%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance&n=502394
    but i'm not willing to spend this much especially considering that my photography skills are at about a -5 on a rang of 1-10. yea i suck.
     
  2. Dnepr

    Dnepr Guest

    you "needed" IS?


    :rofl:
     
  3. Specialist23

    Specialist23 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    29,598
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    minnesota
    plus i got a really good filter, i think it's B&W or something like that for the brand name. like i said, i'm a noob at this. the filter itself was around $60, but well worth it from what i can tell.
     
  4. Specialist23

    Specialist23 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    29,598
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    minnesota
    yea i know i suck.
     
  5. Dnepr

    Dnepr Guest

    BW filter? :rofl:
     
  6. Dnepr

    Dnepr Guest

    :omg: I cant wait till tomash sees this :mamoru:
     
  7. Specialist23

    Specialist23 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    29,598
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    minnesota
    is that what it is? i don't know, i just got it. are they bad filters? seem a whole lot better than my other one that i had.
     
  8. Dnepr

    Dnepr Guest


    I read it as black and white filter :o

    B+W filters, never had experience with them.
     
  9. NauticaX

    NauticaX OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2002
    Messages:
    4,418
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Maryland
    B+W filters are good stuff.
     
  10. Specialist23

    Specialist23 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    29,598
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    minnesota
    well that's good to know. at least i know that they are B + W not B & W filters...
     
  11. eof

    eof New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2002
    Messages:
    7,288
    Likes Received:
    0
    Should have got the 28-75....I woke up this morning and mine was sucking my dick. It never disappoints me....
     
  12. Tomash

    Tomash Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Messages:
    77,754
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    :rofl:
     
  13. Derrict

    Derrict No, I am not Amish OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,484
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Amish Country, PA
    I don't see the need of IS on a wide angle lense but that's just me. 70-200, sure, 17-85 eh, not as necessary (imo).
     
  14. CRC

    CRC New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2002
    Messages:
    14,893
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    PDX
    :hs:

    5.6 is sooo slow :wtc:
     
  15. Specialist23

    Specialist23 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    29,598
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    minnesota
    i was going to, in fact i was really close to as it is a few hundo cheaper, but i really need the IS and the range is obviously a little better for what i'm using it for. and yes the 5.6 is slow, but i really don't notice the difference.
     
  16. eof

    eof New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2002
    Messages:
    7,288
    Likes Received:
    0
    You don't need the IS...you just think you do. f2.8 > IS

    Reasons Why
    1. Cheaper
    2. Can shoot moving subjects in low light and there is no blur (IS you can shoot in low light but IS doesn't help fight motion blur.)
    3. If shake is a problem leaning against a wall or using a tri/monopod is easier than spending $200
    4. When was the last time you woke up with an IS lens with its mouth around your cock? Happens all the time with the 28-75 and I don't even need to ask.
     
  17. Tomash

    Tomash Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Messages:
    77,754
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Wide angle or telephoto, it still lets give you those few shutter stops.
     
  18. Specialist23

    Specialist23 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    29,598
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    minnesota
    although i agree with you for the most part, i really do have insane shakey hands. i think it's from all the years of typing, gaming and worse yet smoking. either way, it drives me nuts that i can't get a steady picture unless it's in the middle of the day.

    BUT seeing your point and perhaps listening to it, are the pics from the 28-75 going to be that much better with f2.8 vs. f4? i'm a n00b so i don't know.
     
  19. Specialist23

    Specialist23 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    29,598
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    minnesota
    why can't they just make a lens that goes from ~17mm-200mm that has an ~f2.8? honestly, even if it was around $1000 i would still get it. i know that there is a canon but it's around $2500 from what i was told.
     
  20. SpiderOnTheFloor

    SpiderOnTheFloor New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2003
    Messages:
    11,348
    Likes Received:
    0
    17mm is better than 28mm though. although, I agree that the IS is such a false sense of security especially with that lens.
     
  21. eof

    eof New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2002
    Messages:
    7,288
    Likes Received:
    0
    f8-f11 are usually your sharpest "best" apatures so in terms of sharpness. f2.8 is just alot better than f4 for DOF and low light shooting. With low light I think IS saves you two stops...so truth be told you can shoot handheld at a bit lower light than I can. BUT if your subject is moving all the IS in the would couldn't help you...where as I am much more able to shoot moving subjects because my shutter speed is higher.
     
  22. Specialist23

    Specialist23 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    29,598
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    minnesota
    man for real. why didn't the stupid guy tell me this?...fricken sales people. but if i'm mainly using this for shot of my kid, who moves around a lot, but i also want close ups, should i stay with what i have or switch to the tamron? reason being the 18 vs 28 for wide angle.
     
  23. eof

    eof New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2002
    Messages:
    7,288
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am sure the IS will work fine for what you are doing but I do not doubt that the 28-75 would better suite your needs and you would save money. :dunno:
     
  24. eof

    eof New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2002
    Messages:
    7,288
    Likes Received:
    0
    For shooting portraits (people) you should be using like 70mm or higher. Wide angle is not good for shooting people because it distorts their faces and makes noses look big...
     
  25. presidente

    presidente New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2003
    Messages:
    343
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    HouS2k TX

    there is a 18-200mm 3.5 with similar function as the IS which is equal to 4 stops down:dunno:
     

Share This Page