From cartel to surfer.
cool kid
Cant decide between 70-200 and 100-400. argh-Whiteroom- wrote:
I want to pick up a 70-200 2.8 and a 2X teleconverter eventually, otherwise I would be on the 70-200 f4 train. Looks great for a great price.
Get the 70-200 now and a 2x for when I need it; mainly use it on bright days so the low fstop isnt too bad.
Then get a 400 f5.6 in a year or two.
- globefish23
- sophisticated slacker
- +334|6577|Graz, Austria
If I had to guess, it was put there for the photo.
Is that one of those amber necklaces with magical powers against baby's toothing aches?
I avoid anything around my kids' necks that doesn't open with the slightest touch. Yes it is. Not supposed to be magical. Apparently oils or some such, never read up on it, baby shower gift I think. I don't know if it works, all I know is I have a baby that rarely cries, and when he does it's always easy to solve. So if it ain't broke...
Also never had any issues with it around his neck, and it goes around his ankle when he sleeps.
Last edited by -Whiteroom- (2013-04-25 15:21:34)
apparently quote broke..
- globefish23
- sophisticated slacker
- +334|6577|Graz, Austria
Those amber necklaces are as effective against toothing pains as are those quartz thingies blocking dangerous cell phone radiation.
Sorry, I didn't mean to be offensive.
How old is he now?
He seems to be able to sit on his own fairly good, so he's probably 6-7 months old by now.
Sorry, I didn't mean to be offensive.
How old is he now?
He seems to be able to sit on his own fairly good, so he's probably 6-7 months old by now.
I shed a tear for that piano.
My younger brother's daughter was kind enough to pose for us;
https://www.facebook.com/Dynamicmobilephotography?fref=tck
dead
alive http://www.dynamicmobilephotography.com.au/
dead
alive http://www.dynamicmobilephotography.com.au/
Last edited by RTHKI (2013-04-30 13:38:25)
damit kimmmmmmm i was set on a 70-200 but you made me look again
She has nice feet.13urnzz wrote:
My younger brother's daughter was kind enough to pose for us;
Whatcha lookin at now?RTHKI wrote:
damit kimmmmmmm i was set on a 70-200 but you made me look again
Ohhhh ok then.. not having used a 2x before i have a lack of confidence in them. just figured hey while your at it - buying a big fat lens - might as well get the distance
I just want the 70 for the f2.8
Not looking to spend as much as canon wants. Apparently the sigma 2.8 is better bang for your buck unless you're selling the pics.
1.7lb v 3.1lb
tempting but duno if i wanna carry around that much all day
i have 2 weeks to decide
tempting but duno if i wanna carry around that much all day
i have 2 weeks to decide
Went to the aquarium today. Made me realize that f4 does not cut it inside... the only faster thing I had was my 50 1.8, and that's not wide enough. May have to forgo the 18-135 and the 24-105 f4 in favor of a faster zoom.
when i went to the aquarium all i had was the 40mm pancake. did alright. reflections were the worst thing
Yeah. I'm thinking now the 40mm woul have been better for aps-c there are affordable 24, 28, and 35mm primes aswell. A fast zoom walkabout would be though. Tamron does a 28-75mm. Not as wide as I would prefer, but if you want to save...