- Messages
- 5,813
- Edit My Images
- No
See you've made your mind up then, @JJ! ?!
I figured if it's the wrong move I can always go back!!
See you've made your mind up then, @JJ! ?!
I figured if it's the wrong move I can always go back!!
I figured if it's the wrong move I can always go back!!
I am thinking of sacking off the 70-200 to fund a 58. Whilst a really do like the lens, I just don't use it much, if at all since August. The 58 would mean that I can dismantle the 50 to try a bit of that funky freelensing malarkey too.
Just seen photos are starting to trickle through on the Derbyshire Photography FB page, not at all jealousI saw on FB that they're starting to trickle now so tomorrow would be a good bet. Some more rain forecast over the next few days too so they should be a go'er.
Good question. I can't think of a good reason why insurers wouldn't cover you, other than the fact that they're insurers and will use any excuse not to pay outQuestion time.
The D750 is happening but I have a question over UK or grey.
I always insure my kit (Aaduki at present) - will UK insurers cover grey kit?
They are closed for the weekend now so can't call to find out. If not I'm off to LCE tomorrow otherwise it's Panamoz.
I am thinking of sacking off the 70-200 to fund a 58. Whilst a really do like the lens, I just don't use it much, if at all since August. The 58 would mean that I can dismantle the 50 to try a bit of that funky freelensing malarkey too.
Just seen photos are starting to trickle through on the Derbyshire Photography FB page, not at all jealous
What's your current set up?
Seems an insane amount of money for a prime, saying that I would love to try one!
Nikon 600mm f4 says hello!Seems an insane amount of money for a prime, saying that I would love to try one!
35G, 50G, 85G, 24-70G & Tammy 70-200, 750 & 610.
Not at all. 3 of my lenses are around that cost and I tend to buy for the long-term. I think I tend to use 35/50 the most really.
35/85 1.4's?
I'd be so tempted to sell the 24-70 and 70-200 and wait for a Sigma 135mm 1.8 ART or buy a Nikon 105 1.4.
Some shots are overdone for a reason But no, I'm not really jealous. I do admit there are other better views in the PeaksReally?
Are you really jealous? Really?
It is such a boring shot imo. The view is dire.
I've already seen about 10 shots from there and they've only been flowing a day. FFS.
There are so many better views within the Peak District. Have a little imagination dude.
Yup, 1.4's.
I use the 24-70 for my home studio stuff generally, it's handy for that. I'd love someone to do a new 135.
Some shots are overdone for a reason But no, I'm not really jealous. I do admit there are other better views in the Peaks
Like Sigma you mean?
Local London Camera showing as in stock
Hmmmm... that could give me a sleepless night!
Glad they I have sown the seeds
A couple of silhouettes.
Ooh Err, dunno what happened there lol
That's a fair point.
I take your point re cropping the second pic but I think removing the turbines would take away a sense of depth.
I guess I'm weird... I like the turbines (and pylons too).Nice golden colours in these shots and a nice idea.
2 things I'd do, 1,crop a bit off the bottom of both, 1st one and just above the water line and 2nd about 50% between bottom and horses and I'd clone out the turbines.
So this VRII 70-200. Reading some places that it's not actually 200mm? I don't really get why!!
I have been reading some comparisons between it and the F4 and views are really mixed!
I will leave it up to To to decide whether I should get the 70-200 2.8 this evening...
At close focusing it 'focus breathes' which means it will be less than 200mm. Whether this is really an issue is down to you. I've had both the f4 and VR2, I can honestly say I've not really noticed the issue. If I need extra focal length I attach the 1.4x teleconverter to give a nice 105mm to 280mm f4.So this VRII 70-200. Reading some places that it's not actually 200mm? I don't really get why!!
I have been reading some comparisons between it and the F4 and views are really mixed!
I will leave it up to To to decide whether I should get the 70-200 2.8 this evening...
It's all to do with focus breathing at short focus distances. At close focussing you don't get a true 200mm, it's supposedly more like 135mm. I can't remember what the actual distances are but it's easy to fine example on the internet.Post a link where they say this id be intrested to see why they say it?
It's all to do with focus breathing at short focus distances. At close focussing you don't get a true 200mm, it's supposedly more like 135mm. I can't remember what the actual distances are but it's easy to fine example on the internet.