Dat der lens has gone broke
At FCN 2012 I had a mishap and broke a lens in half. This was the "Second day" of the con and had to switch to a lens I wouldn't normally use.
Had a lot of problems because of it but *sigh* will have to figure out a way to replace it by A.C.
I miss that lens
(Taken on an iPhone)
Extended Message Here
At FCN 2012 I had a mishap and broke a lens in half. This was the "Second day" of the con and had to switch to a lens I wouldn't normally use.
Had a lot of problems because of it but *sigh* will have to figure out a way to replace it by A.C.
I miss that lens
(Taken on an iPhone)
Extended Message Here
Category Photography / Miscellaneous
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 1024 x 765px
File Size 435.4 kB
In my area (Twin Cities) The used/3rd party camera stores pretty much imploded too much competition from a national chains (like best buy) and a local camera change (National Camera). So far for parts/repair it's not worth it. I would get a new. THough I am trying to get a broken lens that I can swap parts in to play with it. Might be perfect but it would be worth a try. (And is fun!)
Had an accident with my favorite lens last year ;)
No this is my con lens
But it's also was
MNFurs lens in reality they used it in their photoshoots that were done by people other than me :).
SO I destroyed not only the con lens I use but the lens a few other people used.
I am specially epic!
No this is my con lens
But it's also was
MNFurs lens in reality they used it in their photoshoots that were done by people other than me :).SO I destroyed not only the con lens I use but the lens a few other people used.
I am specially epic!
Oh, that's very sad. And it's tough to shoot close in with a long lens. But at least the camera was safe.
I dropped an unmounted lens (85mm prime, I think it was) on the observation deck at the top of 30 Rockefeller Center. The neutral density filter did exactly what it was supposed to do and took the brunt of the shock and shattered. But the lens was fine. I made sure that every lens in my bag had a filter after that.
I dropped an unmounted lens (85mm prime, I think it was) on the observation deck at the top of 30 Rockefeller Center. The neutral density filter did exactly what it was supposed to do and took the brunt of the shock and shattered. But the lens was fine. I made sure that every lens in my bag had a filter after that.
Sell it on Ebay for almost as much money as a new one! XD
Ok, so that's a LITTLE bit of an exaggeration, but only a little. I finally entered the digital age with a used EOS 1000D and want something a little better than Mom's old Sigma lenses, but the goofballs on Ebay will bid a broken EF 18-35 up to $40 when there are people selling brand new EFS 18-35 IS lenses for around $100.
Ok, so that's a LITTLE bit of an exaggeration, but only a little. I finally entered the digital age with a used EOS 1000D and want something a little better than Mom's old Sigma lenses, but the goofballs on Ebay will bid a broken EF 18-35 up to $40 when there are people selling brand new EFS 18-35 IS lenses for around $100.
Try this post out
Example in Raw
I need to make a new one I'm much different in raw now. I can do more with the tools that are out. Still a good example.
Example in Raw
I need to make a new one I'm much different in raw now. I can do more with the tools that are out. Still a good example.
For canon the Tamron 17-50 NON VC is a great bang for buck for visual quality. I learned how to handle it without the VC.
Since it has no VC and the focus is slow it was a cheaper lens.
Our local photographers loved it mind you they didn't buy one they just borrowed mine :)
Since it has no VC and the focus is slow it was a cheaper lens.
Our local photographers loved it mind you they didn't buy one they just borrowed mine :)
From canon opinions
If you don't care about IS or fast focus then the Tamron non VC.
IT's still good if you care the glass is nice
THen if IS/VC etc is needed it's a competition between Canon and Sigma. Tamron's VC doesn't do as good overall (Slower focus)
But you have to look at the shots like Sigma's does a weird venting at 17mm at f/2.8 while f/4.0 it's cleared up Tamron VC does it at 50mm at f/2.8 and canon well it's weird :)
Anywyas there is no real winner
If you don't care about IS or fast focus then the Tamron non VC.
IT's still good if you care the glass is nice
THen if IS/VC etc is needed it's a competition between Canon and Sigma. Tamron's VC doesn't do as good overall (Slower focus)
But you have to look at the shots like Sigma's does a weird venting at 17mm at f/2.8 while f/4.0 it's cleared up Tamron VC does it at 50mm at f/2.8 and canon well it's weird :)
Anywyas there is no real winner
FA+

Comments