Heheh... saw my pic of myself in there...
I was juz ranting for being stuck on the wrong side of the fence when the tide turns.
also, I'm already pushing my 30D at it's limits (particularly in the af department) and was ready to jump to 1d3 since it was introduced in sg. was out of stock till end 07, then af problems. then, I made a serious mistake in touching the nikon D3 +14-24/2.8 and followed by additional poisoning by the D700... sigh. economically constraint, so juz ranting if you dun mind.
How many users actually need a MkIII? And your observation of 'a company spending so much resources....getting THAT photo wants to risk it to a chancy AF ...' is probably why there are so many more black lenses on the line this Olympics.
regarding olympics, my point isn't more black lenses.. rather there should not be any white lenses already. it just shows that the 1d can still perform as required.
2nd.. it really depends.. some need buffer, some need high iso, some need fps. but i need fast and accurate af that works at f8, for canon non can make it for me at the moment... why? cuz i prefer to shoot macro using af instead of tripod... still trying to catch a closeup of butterfly in flight... sigh...
Pre-focus and laser triggering insects in flight.
In actual use, it really looks light and super easy to use: http://www.pbase.com/fotoopa/image/72036922
Last edited by Dream Merchant; 12th August 2008 at 06:15 PM.
Minolta. Konica Minolta. Sony
Black lens could also very well be a Sigma.
This is like arguing semantics.
Here's another view... someone counted 42 black to 34 white.
Not all black are nikon though. Can be Sigma. I can imagine someone choosing the 120-300 2.8 over original maker's 300mm 2.8. Having said that, there's no denying that nikon is back strong. I remember when you can only see a sea of white and only a few black lenses at the athens olympics. Hopefully canon will do something about their next generation of lenses.
I say watch out for Ricoh in the next Olympics!