AF-S 28-70 mm f/2.8D ED-IF
- Thread starter Noakram
- Start date
- Status
If one can afford a better lens he should invest in one, period. Lens do not depreciate 50% over-night.
If one cannot afford a good lens, then he should get one which he is comfortable with. If you say you cannot afford a good lens every1 will understand 'cos these things aren't cheap. There's no shame in admiting you can't afford an expensive lens.
Don't use weight as an excuse just because one cannot afford it. :nono:
If one cannot afford a good lens, then he should get one which he is comfortable with. If you say you cannot afford a good lens every1 will understand 'cos these things aren't cheap. There's no shame in admiting you can't afford an expensive lens.
Don't use weight as an excuse just because one cannot afford it. :nono:
Sadly, all equipments depreciate by 30-50% if u decide to resell it even after 1 week.
I am getting my maths wrong here.
Ok, for me, I find the lens light since the ones (camera/lenses/whatever) I work with are mostly 15kg and above, excluding tripods. Girls I know have to carry that weight too & its really quite manageable after a while.
But using these expensive lenses to take wedding shots or events shots has no impact whatsoever because the extra 20% of quality n details goes unnoticed anyway.
Passing a USD100 bill to the race queen in tokyo or vegas to say that you like to take a shot of her. You pay them because you are a professional, and you take them as a professional as well has never failed to make them try to get my attention each time I walk pass. And yes, its cheaper than investing in expensive lenses that does nothing for my production pipeline.
I hope our local photographers are smarter than that too, although of course its not a shame to say that one can't afford an expensive lens. Then again, how expensive is expensive?
Ok, for me, I find the lens light since the ones (camera/lenses/whatever) I work with are mostly 15kg and above, excluding tripods. Girls I know have to carry that weight too & its really quite manageable after a while.
But using these expensive lenses to take wedding shots or events shots has no impact whatsoever because the extra 20% of quality n details goes unnoticed anyway.
Passing a USD100 bill to the race queen in tokyo or vegas to say that you like to take a shot of her. You pay them because you are a professional, and you take them as a professional as well has never failed to make them try to get my attention each time I walk pass. And yes, its cheaper than investing in expensive lenses that does nothing for my production pipeline.
I hope our local photographers are smarter than that too, although of course its not a shame to say that one can't afford an expensive lens. Then again, how expensive is expensive?
V
vince123123
Guest
Yes indeed. The AF speed is amazing. I need to re-focus elsewhere to confirm that the AF is working. It is that fast!
Sorry I'm missing something here. Why are you slipping greenbacks to models at events anyway? :dunno:
At any rate, although it may go un-noticed to the untrained photographic eye, don't you feel a little peeved when you view your own works and realise that you had got everything right on the shot but it's let down by your equipment? (although I must admit, we should have made the shot within our own equipment's limitations to begin with...)
As much as it becomes a job, I think there should still be some amount of self-satisfaction... otherwise soon you will lose the passion and at the same time lose the eye for something different. Just a production line churning out photos from every assignment that more or less look the same.
At any rate, although it may go un-noticed to the untrained photographic eye, don't you feel a little peeved when you view your own works and realise that you had got everything right on the shot but it's let down by your equipment? (although I must admit, we should have made the shot within our own equipment's limitations to begin with...)
As much as it becomes a job, I think there should still be some amount of self-satisfaction... otherwise soon you will lose the passion and at the same time lose the eye for something different. Just a production line churning out photos from every assignment that more or less look the same.
You could be looking at at least $1600 - $2000 (depending on age and external condition)...
I'm still "paying installments" to my piggy bank for this (which IMHO is the lens that's most suited for protraiture, unless you're into primes):embrass:
I'm eagerly awaiting it's arrival...
I'm still "paying installments" to my piggy bank for this (which IMHO is the lens that's most suited for protraiture, unless you're into primes):embrass:
I'm eagerly awaiting it's arrival...
You're right! I didn't regret getting this at all though my friends had advised on the 17-55mm as a better all rounder.
- Status