A Backslider's Confession

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by Uncle Frank, Mar 22, 2005.

  1. I have a bad case of Lens Lust Disease, compounded by an unfortunate taste for good glass :(.
    Their combined power has lured me down a long and twisty trail.

    June '04: I bought the d70, but passed on the kit lens. I did a lot of research before buying,
    and decided the 24-120VR would suit my style better than the 18-70, and be a great walk
    around lens. It was, but...

    September '04: I added the 80-200/2.8 AFD to my kit, and discovered the benefits and joy of
    pro-glass. It made me realize that there was a level that the 24-120VR couldn't reach. I started
    researching alternatives, but decided the 28-70/2.8 was too expensive and heavy to consider.

    December '04: A friend who was upgrading to a 17-55DX offered me his Tamron 28-75/2.8.
    Sample variation is a big problem with this lens, but he was able to vouch for it.

    January '05: The Tamron quickly replaced the 24-120VR in my kit, so I sold it at a $175 discount
    from my purchase price. The Tamron is a wonderful lens for the money. It's sharp as a
    tack from tip to tip throughout its aperture and zoom ranges, but... it gives a slight yellow cast
    to images, and it doesn't work quite as well with the sb800 as my Nikon lenses. Focus isn't as
    reliable as with the Nikon lenses, either.

    February '04: I made a huge mistake. I tried out the Nikon 28-70. The test shots had that very
    special feel to them, and the lens felt "right" in my hands. Damn.

    Today: I bought a "brand new" 28-70/2.8 demo model on eBay from an authorized Nikon dealer.
    It comes with a full Nikon warranty, and even qualifies for the Nikon rebate, so the net cost
    will be $900. After I check it out, I'll sell the Tamron.

    For those of you with similar leanings towards good glass, I hope that you'll be any happier
    over the long term than I was with the alternatives to big glass. The two drawbacks of the
    28-70/2.8 is that it's expensive and heavy. Granted, the price is high... but it's built like a
    tank, so I've taken a mindset that I will amortize it over a long period. Weight? It's a
    mere 11 ounces heavier than my old 24-120VR. Not exactly a back breaker.

    Here's a picture of my new baby :D

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Frank you do have it bad. I am humming the song "My Heart Bleeds For You". :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

    It's a "good-bad" :D :D :D :D
     
  3. Flew

    Flew

    994
    Jan 25, 2005
    Alabama
    Hey Frank,

    Reminds me of the underlying thought processes that prompted my I'm Mentally Ill post.... :lol: :lol:

    I first bought the 70-200VR thinking that 200 was 'long enough' for shooting birdies. I quickly found out that it wasn't, so a few months later I got the 300 2.8, and also got the 1.4, 1.7 and 2.0 TC's.

    Now don't get me wrong, this is a wonderful lens, but I often find myself wanting more length. Now the 200-400VR, 400 f2.8, and 500 f4 are on my 'lust list'. :?

    As I said before, we are sick. 8)

    Frank
     
  4. obelix

    obelix

    714
    Mar 17, 2005
    Fremont, CA, USA
    Congrats.

    Uncle Frank, I ordered the 70-200 VR yesterday (sold my 70-210 & 300mm f/4 to raise funds). Feeling a bit sick.

    But then posts like this help to know that you are not alone / crazy.
     
  5. Umm, they let you know you're not alone, but don't rule out being crazy. In point of fact, we all are :p.

    Congratulations on your new lens, Anand! Did you get a deal on it?
     
  6. Just wait. Your turn will come, Dawg. I clearly see a 70/80-200 f/2.8 in your future :p.
     
  7. When you start considering $5000 lenses, you're terminally sick 8)!

    I'd say "never", but I remember saying that about the 28-70/2.8 a few months back :? :oops:.
     
  8. GeeJay

    GeeJay

    Jan 26, 2005
    Florida
    Hi Uncle Frank,

    I am very happy for you and am already looking for the 28-70 pictures you'll post...so get moving on that so we can start thinking about getting that lens :lol:

    Best to you!

    Gaye

    You really did get a good deal on the lens with the warranty and rebate. Which camera shop on Ebay? Just curious :lol:
     
  9. obelix

    obelix

    714
    Mar 17, 2005
    Fremont, CA, USA
    I paid $1570 for the lens. There is a $150 mail in rebate, that makes the lens $1420. This was from jr.com. I had to price match them with buydig.com and saved $30 - not much.

    This lens is too popular. I did not get a good deal on this lens at all. It usually sells for $1200 upwards and that too has been used at least for 2 years.

    anand
     
  10. :shock: :shock: I'M SCARED!!! :shock: :shock:
     
  11. Thanks, Gaye; you're a real pal :).

    That'll have to wait until I get my d70 back from the Nikon Hospital. I just sent it in last week for warranty work.

    The dealer is Alkit. They have both a brick & mortar and an eBay store, and, as I said, are authorized
    Nikon dealers. I gave them a call and discussed the lens extensively before I bid. It was a demo in
    their shop, and lived in a glass case for 4 months. They claim the only sign of use is a bit of minor
    marking on the lens mount from taking it on and off various cameras. We'll see 8).
     
  12. Frank, I just want to comfort you - you are not alone with your dilemma. I was suffering from a very advanced state of lens lust, but it seems that I have eventually fevered it out. But only because I'm aware that I am far too lazy for the long FL end.
    In case you are interested, here's my desease history:
    June 02: The desaster commenced - my institute bought me a D1X and a Sigma 17-35 to go with it. The lens is a lemon and didn't see day light for a long period.
    August 02: AF 50/1.8, Sigma 70-200/2.8 APO HSM
    April 03: 45/2.8 P, the 50/1.8 is collecting dust since then.
    May 03: AF 60/2.8 Mikro, AFS 28-70/2.8, the latter is only used now when I need flexibility.
    January 04: AFS 12-24 DX
    July 04: Ai 35/1.4, AiS 28/2.0; I love the build of these "old" but optically outstanding lenses.
    October 04: AFS 70-200/2.8 VR; it replaced the Sigma 70-200 (not sold yet)
    November 04: AF 85/1.4, TC 14E
    January 05: AF 28/1.4; there was some conflict between buying this lens or the 17-55, but finally Ron Reznick's input made me go for the 28/1.4
    February 05: Canon 500D closeup lens.

    You see I am well equipped at the shorter end (and still married :) ), so I am almost cured. There might occur a slight set-back when I come across a cheap 85PC.
    The long end has to wait until I can easily afford let's say a 200-400, but I would rather buy a D2X (and naturally a new computer :roll: ) before that.

    I hope I haven't made your case worse by posting this, I just wanted to show that you're in good company.
    Cheers
     
  13. Gale

    Gale

    978
    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    I remember UF that you said " no need for DSLR" and here you are turning into a sick pup , just like the rest of us. :>)))))))


    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

    hummmmmmmmmmmmm
     
  14. Thanks, Harry. It's comforting to know I'm surrounded by madmen of similar persuasion :twisted:.
     
  15. I'll stand by that remark. But it turns out that need and desire are entirely different things :twisted:.
     
  16. Gale

    Gale

    978
    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    I have to say you held out right to the end Frank I think you were the last to get the DSLR..

    I still use the 5000 :>))) Even bought the wide angle and 3x tele for it in December after having the camera for over two years. Now that is a sick pup. Then turn around and get an 80-400 VR VR VR VR for the D100 and I just ordered a lensbaby.


    BAHAHAHAHA

    Cheers
    Gale

    hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm


    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
     
  17. Flew

    Flew

    994
    Jan 25, 2005
    Alabama
    Gale, you are a riot.

    I've called the riot police.... :lol: :lol:

    Frank
     
  18. Frank, congratz on your new tank... let me give you a future view -if I may... :wink:

    Ohh Frank, you're NOT alone... I think we're ALL sick...!!! 8)
     
  19. Gale

    Gale

    978
    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    Flew

    Are the riot police better than the paddy wagon, ya know the one with the white jackets.. If so, Thats makes me feel a bit safer.

    lolololol


    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
     
  20. Gale

    Gale

    978
    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    Oh yeah need a CF tripod toooooooooo

    And one of those things Flew has. A side winder.. lolololol