08-08-2009, 01:51 AM | #23 | ||
Colonel
156
Rep 2,368
Posts |
Quote:
17-55 is a good decision actually. But for ~$1300 is it worth the price tag? Going to look into that.. Edit: actually according to kenrockwell: Quote:
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
08-08-2009, 02:38 AM | #24 |
Colonel
397
Rep 2,526
Posts |
You will see the difference...trust me. Especially at the end of the focal lengths. At 55mm, the 17-55mm will be able to shoot at 2.8 while the 18-55mm will have to deal with a slow, bokeh-torturing f/5.6.
You get what you pay for... Always buy used if you can see the lens in person. I got my 17-55mm for $775 from a professional and sold it for $850 when I was done |
Appreciate
0
|
08-08-2009, 02:18 PM | #26 |
aka 1013MM
1345
Rep 9,545
Posts |
you got sucked in by kenrockwell....
take his advice lightly cause hes biased. although I use nikons too.
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-08-2009, 03:35 PM | #27 |
Major
298
Rep 1,088
Posts |
I think more beginners choose Nikon over Canon as their first DSLR is simply because Nikon has a better naming system. I think the way Canon name their cameras are rather confusing.
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-08-2009, 04:16 PM | #28 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
121
Rep 1,545
Posts
Drives: '22 i4 M50
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
|
Quote:
Anyway, I am going to sell my nikon gear very soon, if you are interested in any of these lenses, just shoot me a PM or something (nikon 12-24 f/4, nikon 17-55 f/2.8, nikon 10.5 f/2.8 fisheye, nikon 24 f/2.8)
__________________
2022 i4 M50, Dravit Grey. fully loaded minus the carbon fiber bits and 20" wheel package
2007 E92 335i, 6MT, Sparking Graphite, ZPP, ZSP, Nav, Logic7 (Sold) |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-08-2009, 04:28 PM | #29 | |
Colonel
397
Rep 2,526
Posts |
Quote:
While Canon has the T1i, XSi, 5D Mk.II, 1Ds Mk.III. Like seriously how is that better than D40, D60, D90, D300, D700, D3. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-08-2009, 04:51 PM | #30 |
Lieutenant Colonel
121
Rep 1,545
Posts
Drives: '22 i4 M50
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
|
For the bodies, you're right. My mistake, I was referring to the classification system on Nikon's lenses, e.g. the 24mm 2.8D and there is a non-D version I believe (I don't know what the D means). Then you have AF G for another letter/acronym, AF-S, AF-I, ED, IF, and whatever else there is. For Canon lenses, we mainly just have the the EF and EF-S, IS, TS-E. Maybe Nikon's makes sense but I just haven't bothered to learn the acronyms.
__________________
2022 i4 M50, Dravit Grey. fully loaded minus the carbon fiber bits and 20" wheel package
2007 E92 335i, 6MT, Sparking Graphite, ZPP, ZSP, Nav, Logic7 (Sold) Last edited by sourphish; 08-08-2009 at 05:24 PM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
08-08-2009, 05:10 PM | #31 |
aka 1013MM
1345
Rep 9,545
Posts |
yea canon was a confusing choice when i was a newb. but then again i was newb.
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-08-2009, 06:57 PM | #32 | |
Colonel
156
Rep 2,368
Posts |
Quote:
Because I was pretty happy with with 18-55 and 55-200 except the fact that it was annoying to switch the lens. But it seems like everyone doesn't really like that lens.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-09-2009, 02:24 AM | #33 | |
Colonel
397
Rep 2,526
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-09-2009, 02:44 AM | #34 |
Colonel
156
Rep 2,368
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-09-2009, 02:55 AM | #35 |
Brigadier General
130
Rep 3,236
Posts |
canon gave USA the retarded name system. everywhere else its the 350d, 400d, 450d, 500d, 40d, 50d, 5d mk.2, 1ds mk 3..
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-09-2009, 02:58 AM | #36 |
Colonel
397
Rep 2,526
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|