Canon EOS 450D Club - GED - IV


Status
Not open for further replies.
i'm not gg cp liao. just called and they dont hv stock for sigma 70-300. anyway they quoted $370. op quoted $330 wor and they got stock.

u all tried calling b4? they talk like very short sentences. like.."hello, which mount? $370. dead tone.."

those willingly to talk ones are j 316 and mscolor. tats wat i feel.
Very true indeed. But when you call John 3:16, no one will answer. They are all occupied. Busy shop.


GMAN
 

Sometimes I seriously dun understand what they want seriously.

Noise too high. I use USM and Noise Ninja and remove to the best of my ability already. They change to say that too much of that kind of genre. Like heck, can't you tell me everything in one reply and dun waste my time removing all the specks and get on with another genre. :angry:
Another person using my product. Haha!!!!


GMAN
 

hai guys, duno if i shld plonk my $ for the tamron 17-50 to replace my kit or get e 55-250 first later! argh. somehow i keep thinking of the practicality of having what lenses and thus the lens we'll usually buy/upgrade to first.. tough decision.
 

hai guys, duno if i shld plonk my $ for the tamron 17-50 to replace my kit or get e 55-250 first later! argh. somehow i keep thinking of the practicality of having what lenses and thus the lens we'll usually buy/upgrade to first.. tough decision.

Before you start worrying about what lens to get next, you should be asking what is wrong with the 18-55 kit lens. Is the focal length not enough? Need more speed for low light? Lens not shap enough? Just want to spend money?

If you can decide what is wrong with the current lens(es) you have now, you can then decide what you want next.

Anyway, the Tamron 17-55 lens is a good lens at a good price if you don't mind not having IS. The EF-S 55-250 is also a good lens and one that I use alot.
 

Before you start worrying about what lens to get next, you should be asking what is wrong with the 18-55 kit lens. Is the focal length not enough? Need more speed for low light? Lens not shap enough? Just want to spend money?

If you can decide what is wrong with the current lens(es) you have now, you can then decide what you want next.

Anyway, the Tamron 17-55 lens is a good lens at a good price if you don't mind not having IS. The EF-S 55-250 is also a good lens and one that I use alot.

hi nitroxgear, thanks for replying,

somehow i keep feeling my pics taken from the kit is always not sharp enough. its usually sharp AFTER i do some PS-ing to them. kindof sad. i'm pretty sure its not handshake, thus thinking of an alternative. read alooot of raving reviews abt the tammy, have friends who owns them etc. i'm pretty comfortable with the kit range and thus again, falls within the tammy range also.

thus i was trying to ask myself if different lenses produces different pic quality, i.e. pic sharpness. of cuz the canon 17-55 is the better choice BUT, its double the price, thus not for now.

e tele 55-250 i only started considering when was doing some shoots and have to miss some shots because i can't reach with my kit. kindof frustrating.

but on e long run, i'm still thinking which option would be more practical. thus the dilemma.
 

hi nitroxgear, thanks for replying,

somehow i keep feeling my pics taken from the kit is always not sharp enough. its usually sharp AFTER i do some PS-ing to them. kindof sad. i'm pretty sure its not handshake, thus thinking of an alternative. read alooot of raving reviews abt the tammy, have friends who owns them etc. i'm pretty comfortable with the kit range and thus again, falls within the tammy range also.

thus i was trying to ask myself if different lenses produces different pic quality, i.e. pic sharpness. of cuz the canon 17-55 is the better choice BUT, its double the price, thus not for now.

e tele 55-250 i only started considering when was doing some shoots and have to miss some shots because i can't reach with my kit. kindof frustrating.

but on e long run, i'm still thinking which option would be more practical. thus the dilemma.

IC :) Then IMO, the Tamron 17-55 is a good budget choice..I am using the Tamron too and found it to be much better than the kit lens and I am very happy with it. Really can't go very wrong for a lens without IS and till now I have not really missed the IS for this length.

However, for you I would say you should go for the 55-250mm lens to give you the reach you need as the 18-55 kit lens is as you said, sharp after some PP so it's good enough for now till you have budget to get both lenses.

Good luck with your choice :)
 

Last edited:
He. He quite unfriendly I would say. His mandarin slang more like from china

He seems fine with me. He actually remembers me although I seldom go there for my stuff cos my priority is always get at CP 1st before at OP.

And at OP, I always get discounts but at CP, I get personal attention from James when I asked for it. :)
 

e tele 55-250 i only started considering when was doing some shoots and have to miss some shots because i can't reach with my kit. kindof frustrating.

but on e long run, i'm still thinking which option would be more practical. thus the dilemma.

Conisdering that you missed some shots before, putting yourself in the same situation again and think it through. Would you want to miss those shots again?

I gotten my 55-250 tele is bcos I was in the same situation and missed the shots and that caused me to go with the tele to complement my kit lens. My kit lens is sharp enough although it's slow. ;)
 

hai guys, duno if i shld plonk my $ for the tamron 17-50 to replace my kit or get e 55-250 first later! argh. somehow i keep thinking of the practicality of having what lenses and thus the lens we'll usually buy/upgrade to first.. tough decision.

55-250mm then! And that's final! ;)

55-250mm goes well with your kit lens while 17-50mm is just a replacement of your kit lens with very little benefits apart from the obvious ones since they're similar range.
 

55-250mm then! And that's final! ;)

55-250mm goes well with your kit lens while 17-50mm is just a replacement of your kit lens with very little benefits apart from the obvious ones since they're similar range.

After the 55-250mm can then start to aim for the 100-400mm L ...lol! :D
 

After the 55-250mm can then start to aim for the 100-400mm L ...lol! :D

:bsmilie: I'm tempted! 100-400mm L never fails to amaze me with the quality, especially when used with cropped bodies to take some pictures of birds. :thumbsup:

If I were to get it, that means I'll have to replace my existing dry cabinet since the storage space is running out fast.
 

:bsmilie: I'm tempted! 100-400mm L never fails to amaze me with the quality, especially when used with cropped bodies to take some pictures of birds. :thumbsup:

If I were to get it, that means I'll have to replace my existing dry cabinet since the storage space is running out fast.

I already started saving up for this baby...*drool* I will then sell off my 55-250 to make room for it...cannot wait for that day...dreaming of all the nature shots I will try out.

Actually is there a 3rd party alternative to this lens? (meaning budget)...400mm focal length with IS too?
 

Last edited:
I already started saving up for this baby...*drool* I will then sell off my 55-250 to make room for it...cannot wait for that day...dreaming of all the nature shots I will try out

:bsmilie: I went for 100mm f/2.8 macro first. Previously when I was going to get that 100-400mm L, 24-105mm L was right beside it. :devil:

The "red rubber bands"!!!!! :sweat:
 

Actually is there a 3rd party alternative to this lens? (meaning budget)...400mm focal length with IS too?
Not that I know of. I enquired about it and the closest one that I can find is Sigma 150-500mm. Of course, that's without OS.

One issue with 100-400mm L is the push and pull way of zooming. Potential problem for dust, eh?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top