DNP0i$onou$ Clubh0us3 - TCSS Thread IX

[coolthought]

===============
ok.... BBQ NITE
Date/Time: Wednesday 17 Nov, 1900 onwards
Location: ZCA's poolside (off Stevens Rd). Nearest MRT - Orchard/Newton

who's interested?
1) DD123
2) kriegsketten & family
3) Smiles88
4) coolthought and shadows (tentatively)
5)
6)
7)
.
.
.

 

[scubagolfer]

===============
ok.... BBQ NITE
Date/Time: Wednesday 17 Nov, 1900 onwards
Location: ZCA's poolside (off Stevens Rd). Nearest MRT - Orchard/Newton

who's interested?
1) DD123
2) kriegsketten & family
3) Smiles88
4) coolthought and shadows (tentatively)
5) Scubagolfer (no Mrs)
6)
7)
.
.
.

 

[WhiteFields]

===============
ok.... BBQ NITE
Date/Time: Wednesday 17 Nov, 1900 onwards
Location: ZCA's poolside (off Stevens Rd). Nearest MRT - Orchard/Newton

who's interested?
1) DD123
2) kriegsketten & family
3) Smiles88
4) coolthought and shadows (tentatively)
5) WhiteFields
6)
7)
.
.
.

although not that active in this forum like u guys.. still can join right?

 

[Smiles88]

===============
ok.... BBQ NITE
Date/Time: Wednesday 17 Nov, 1900 onwards
Location: ZCA's poolside (off Stevens Rd). Nearest MRT - Orchard/Newton

who's interested?
1) DD123
2) kriegsketten & family
3) Smiles88
4) coolthought and shadows (tentatively)
5)
6)
7)
.
.
.

Shadows? Sounds quite sinister leh. :bsmilie:

 

[coolthought]

Bro... is 21mm still considered UWA??... No point since not on FX... Somemore you can't fit filters for nuts.... no NDs, GNDs, nor 3/4/6/10-stops, and surely no CP-L!! Totally not too good for landscapers...

you are totally right. The better fx uwa lens is the 14-24. Less distortion, still no filter threads. but for the dx bodies will be nikkor 10-24 for the widest.
Since ZCA is so crazy on the prime.....

 

[coolthought]

Shadows? Sounds quite sinister leh. :bsmilie:

becos if I move forward, my shadow forward and where ever I go.

 

[kriegsketten]

you are totally right. The better fx uwa lens is the 14-24. Less distortion, still no filter threads. but for the dx bodies will be nikkor 10-24 for the widest.
Since ZCA is so crazy on the prime.....

I doubt so lah, ZCA is mostly for prime from the wide (not UW) to medium, of course 200mm if he wants to depart with his moolah. :bsmilie:

Frankly, modern day UWA zooms can beat UWA primes already... reviewers are hard-pressed to recommend either type coz zooms can be so value for $$ yet still so sharp. Back in the old days, yes primes are probably the ones to go by and hard to beat...

 

[kriegsketten]

I think the IX thread is a record to beat... hardly two days and it's almost reaching 500... :sweat:

 

[kriegsketten]

Looks like I'm still keen on the TC III... :think: Online reviews says it's better than 1.7E and 2.0E II...

I think should be okay for birding...no need for fast apertures anyway...

Edit: coupled with the VRII... still 100 grams lesser than Sigma 50-500 OS...

 

[quizesilver]

By the way, FOV 70-200 is very good for portraits. If you use the 70-200 on DX, 105-300 FOV... you lose that important 70-105 range which is the sweet spot for a lot of portrait work.

aiya.... die
haha

 

[kriegsketten]

aiya.... die
haha

Seriously... portrait work on DX, I rather use 85mm f/1.4, even 50mm f/1.4 should be okay... I never intended the 70-200 for portraiture anyway... more for less conspicious long reaches without the use of flash... If I'm close enough, I'll take out the 60mm or even 10-24 for closer shots (with SB900 of course)...

 

[quizesilver]

BBQ nite on deepavali (17 Nov) ??

edit: like too many activities in such a short span of time.
anyway see what the response is like.

i will pass this. next day doing photo shoot.

 

[coolthought]

Looks like I'm still keen on the TC III... :think: Online reviews says it's better than 1.7E and 2.0E II...

I think should be okay for birding...no need for fast apertures anyway...

Edit: coupled with the VRII... still 100 grams lesser than Sigma 50-500 OS...

yah... you can feel 100 gram less in your hands....:bsmilie:

 

[quizesilver]

Seriously... portrait work on DX, I rather use 85mm f/1.4, even 50mm f/1.4 should be okay... I never intended the 70-200 for portraiture anyway... more for less conspicious long reaches without the use of flash... If I'm close enough, I'll take out the 60mm or even 10-24 for closer shots (with SB900 of course)...

u shld try the 70-200 for portrait then u see

 

[coolthought]

Looks like I'm still keen on the TC III... :think: Online reviews says it's better than 1.7E and 2.0E II...

I think should be okay for birding...no need for fast apertures anyway...

Edit: coupled with the VRII... still 100 grams lesser than Sigma 50-500 OS...

How about the flying birds, the nesting birds under a dark canopy jousting for position to be fed? Lens not fast enough, how leh?

 

[scubagolfer]

I see the Pros using 70-200 for their Professional studio photo shoot .... Nikon systems ...
They dont use prime leh

 

[kriegsketten]

yah... you can feel 100 gram less in your hands....:bsmilie:

Not only on my hands, but my back as well... :bsmilie: 100 gram means maybe more water I can carry... :bsmilie::sweat:

 

[coolthought]

Seriously... portrait work on DX, I rather use 85mm f/1.4, even 50mm f/1.4 should be okay... I never intended the 70-200 for portraiture anyway... more for less conspicious long reaches without the use of flash... If I'm close enough, I'll take out the 60mm or even 10-24 for closer shots (with SB900 of course)...

So, your intention is to shoot xmm secretly from a distance with this lens preferably in some unexpected pose??

 

[kriegsketten]

How about the flying birds, the nesting birds under a dark canopy jousting for position to be fed? Lens not fast enough, how leh?

Until I reached that need... time being I can care less... ;p:bsmilie: I just need bird to gong gong pose for me can liao... :bsmilie:

 

[coolthought]

Not only on my hands, but my back as well... :bsmilie: 100 gram means maybe more water I can carry... :bsmilie::sweat:

that is less than half the water in a can of coke. You need so little water more to satisfy your thirst?