-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Are you keeping your Prime subscription?
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
What happend?
I was at a birthday party yesterday taking some shots - when I went to zoom in the ring twisted but the barrel wouldn't move.
Luckily I had that ostentatious drain pipe (nb not magic) in my bag but that is only 70mm at its widest. I did some of the best candid portraits I've ever taken with it so it wasnt a complete loss.
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
The Macro switch didn't get stuck by any chance? I find that happens when it's halfway between settings.
LOL! Isn't your Sigma 70mm at it's widest too?
I find the idea of being candid (and hopefully unnoticed) with one of those unimaginable. I have a hard time staying unnoticed, no matter what lens I use.
No switch.
28mm-300mm
Normally I blend well into the background . . . not with the canon lens though.
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
Aah right. Is it nice?
Normally I blend well into the background . . . not with the canon lens though.
I wish they would make their larger L glas available in all-black too. I would love the 70-200 f/2.8L but there's no way I'm walking around with one of those in white.
nice? Yeah. It makes a great walkabout lens thanks to it's size and range.
Took it to the shop this afternoon and they have no problem with honouring the warrenty.
After the problem yesterday I'm glad I got the f4. The 2.8 would have been a pain in the neck.....literally!
Last edited:
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
With what the 24-105 f/4L weighs I can only imagine.
It still mystifies my why a faster lens has to be that much bigger and that much more expensive. Surely it's down to the diaphram and maybe a few of the glass elements (I would imagine the front one(s)). I'm just guessing, of course, I know nothing of lens design. But I do know that over the past few decades, we've become pretty good at minutrising things. I would have hoped at least a little of that would have filtered down to lens design.
It still mystifies my why a faster lens has to be that much bigger and that much more expensive. Surely it's down to the diaphram and maybe a few of the glass elements (I would imagine the front one(s)). I'm just guessing, of course, I know nothing of lens design. But I do know that over the past few decades, we've become pretty good at minutrising things. I would have hoped at least a little of that would have filtered down to lens design.
Not really bothered by the size of the f/4 - its still a beautiful bit of kit to an amateur like me.
Had some enlargements made today and I'm well chuffed.koffiejunkie
Executive Member
Nice! That was way quicker than Canon with your camera!
It was . . . but it happened at a very different time of the year (fortunately).
I guess - it does get used a lot (and sometimes by a not so gentle four year old but I'm not telling them that
).I guess - it does get used a lot (and sometimes by a not so gentle four year old but I'm not telling them that
