1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

I'm cured

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by Uncle Frank, Jul 10, 2007.

  1. This used to be my favorite forum, but I hardly visit any more. It's been ages since I've bought a new lens. Occasionally I come up with an excuse to consider changing glass... like my recent offer to trade my 20/2.8 plus cash for a 12-24... but then something or someone brings me back to earth. In this case, Geno reminded me that it doesn't make any sense for my style of photography. Spoilsport :mad: .

    My current "do anything kit" consists of the 20/2.8, 28-70/2.8, 60 micro, 85/1.4, and 180/2.8. They pack nicely into my Lowepro Nova 5 AW shoulder bag, along with my camera, a couple of flashes, an SU800, some batteries and flash cards. It makes a 17 pound lump of delicious gear that's let me do anything I'm interested in so far.

    I guess I'm cured of LLD. It's probably a failure of imagination, but all I have left to dream about are accessories. How sad.
     
  2. kramk

    kramk Guest

    Hi Frank, I think I'm in the same boat. It's been so long since I bought my last piece of Nikon glass, I can't remember what it was. I could use a 12-24mm, the 135 f2, and a 500 f4 to complete what I think is a killer collection
    (28 1.4, 50 1.4, 85 1.4, 105 fDC, 200VR, 300VR, 400 afsII; sigma 12-24, 17-35, 28-70, 70-200, 200-400, sigma 300-800; and 70-180mm & 200 f4 macros....

    .....but the lens lust is simply gone.

    Most of my buying has been centered around lighting ... strobes, pocketwizards, etc. And I must say light works........ better than good glass, better than good bodies, and certainly better than this bad photographer:biggrin:

    Most of my effort has just been on simply taking better picts and then milking the best i can in post. It's funny how the lens selection seems to matter less and less as time goes on.

    best, mark
     
  3. Wow! Whatta kit! Interesting that your primes are all Nikkor, but your zooms are Sigma. How'd that happen?

    Thanks, Mark.... I'm gonna steal that and make it my mantra.
     
  4. yoyo

    yoyo

    61
    Nov 9, 2006
    The Netherlands
    :eek:  :eek:  :eek: 
     
  5. Frank,

    As one who enjoys portrait work, you definitely need the 200/2 VR. Have you SEEN the bokeh on it?!
     
  6. Commodorefirst

    Commodorefirst Admin/Moderator Administrator

    May 1, 2005
    Missouri
    yep, you don't need the 12-24 at all..... 12mm, 16mm and 17mm,

    Seriously, you make such good use of the 20, it really isn't that different, and you always seem to use the the lower aperture at times too for indoor stuff!

    good choice to stay away.....but still.......I sure wouldn't give mine up.....

    :biggrin:
    Wade

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  7. Tosh

    Tosh

    May 6, 2005
    NY
    Careful there, Frank.
    When you feel you've exhausted all possible play with the toys in NikonLand, you become susceptible to the offerings of the Other Side. :eek: 
    Not that there's anything wrong with being conversant in two systems. :biggrin:
     
  8. Say it isn't so!!! Rats, I helped cure him too!! I wanted his 20 for my 12-24!! :biggrin:

    Actually, I'm happy for you too. I am working on reducing my kit too. Soooo... if you ever get tempted again.... :biggrin:
     
  9. I try to overlook things I can't afford. But I enjoy the bokeh from my Cream Machine...

    81762172.gif
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


    and from the Married Man's 200/2 :wink:.

    View attachment 105076
     

  10. Frank,

    FWIW, here's my objective take on this.

    Geno, over the years, has sold the 28-70 and then bought it again, bashing it in the mean time. He replaced it with a 17-55, which he sold to replace it with a 28-70... I think he also owned the 17-55 twice.
    His take on lenses and various lenses combos was very confusing and hard to follow, especially since he would redo his scheme a few months down the road.

    This being said, I don't think the 20 is doing you any good. You definitely need a 12-24 or a 17-xx. Really, what's the point of your 20? You're shooting weddings so you obviously need a wide zoom. Especially with your style of photography, which involves flash shooting.
     
  11. kramk

    kramk Guest

    Hi again Frank, the only two sigma zooms are the 12-24mm and 300-800mm.
    I got the 12-24 in anticipation of a larger sensor, and the 300-800 ... well, as we all know... it's a bit of a one of a kind.

    Hi Yoyo, 3 eeks is a great way to describe the damage to my wallet!

    Tosh, I think you're dead right here. ...or at least you've nailed me. My last big gear purchase was a 5D and a few lenses to go with it. It hasn't swayed me, but I have to admit, the only thing that's kept me from a 1d3 is all the AF controversy. I guess lust never really ends, does it? Just subsides for a while, or changes direction......

    best, mark
     
  12. Don't worry, Frank

    Hi Frank

    are you sure a 10.5 DX fisheye or a 14 F2.8 or the "famous" 105/135 F2 aren't tempting you? These are NOT "impossible" lenses... :tongue:

    Anyway, as we usually say in Genova, "Don't worry if you don't know how to spend YOUR money: I KNOW and DO it for you gladly" :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
     
  13. cknight

    cknight

    663
    May 2, 2005
    Madison, AL
    Yeah right. Your not cured. Its just in remission.:smile:
     
  14. Well, then you should definitely NOT overlook the 200/2 AIS! :tongue: :biggrin:
     
  15. Nuteshack

    Nuteshack Guest

    agree with Ned:Smoking:
     
  16. :eek: :eek: :biggrin::biggrin: Uh... I don't think your lens lust went away, I think you just bought every lens possible! :biggrin: Oh, and then you mentioned the three lenses you still need. :wink:
     
  17. Well I don't think my LL is cured, I just know that I'll probably never be able to justify the 1 or 2 lenses I dream about.

    I mean maybe the 200-400, but I'd really like the Monster. Of course Mark you could help by saying
    "It really stinks and that it's the worst thing you ever bought".​

    Maybe that would help a little.:redface:
     

  18. Gretchen, if I had your young eyes I might consider it. But the 180/2.8 AF is the better lens for me.
     
  19. kramk

    kramk Guest

    Anthony, Yea, you got me pegged:redface:

    No problem David, IT STINKS!!!:rolleyes: 
    But really, I feel very fortunate to own this and other fine pieces of glass.. Lot's of hard work over many years.... mixed with a moderate amount of decent luck.

    Here's a couple of 100% crops at 800mm from the sigmonster. One telephoto(I forget the f stop, no exif); and one at minimum focus distance wide open, kind of a "macro".

    original.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


    original.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


    best, mark
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.