How much could you drop on photography without thinking about it

Wedge said:
Nikon MB-D10 Battery Grip for D300 / D300s / D700
£259.49
Nikon SB-900 Speedlight Flashgun
£316.00
Nikon D700 Digital SLR Camera Body
£1763.99
Nikon TC-14E AF-S Teleconverter II
304.99
Nikon 300mm f4 D AF-S IF ED Lens
£964.99
Nikon 135mm f2 D AF DC Lens
£958.99
Nikon 85mm f1.4 D AF Lens
£886.99
Nikon 80-400mm f4.5-5.6 D AF VR Lens
£1168.99
Nikon 10-24mm f3.5-4.5 G AF-S DX Lens
£638.99
Delivery:
£4.99

Total:
£7268.41

I'd be a very happy bunny if i could have the above :D
Click to expand...

Why use DX glass on a FF camera, and not very good DX glass at that ?
 
dannyjo22 said:
I have to be the unluckiest lens buyer of all time. 17-55 came today with dust in the front element. I initially convinced myself it didn't matter and I'd end up with some in it anyway.

Then after an hour of it on my mind I sent it back, I dropped that much money I should expect better out of the box?
Click to expand...


It collects in there anyway. Keep it and send it back at 11 months old.

I didn't bother in the end but up to you really.
 
dannyjo22 said:
I have to be the unluckiest lens buyer of all time. 17-55 came today with dust in the front element. I initially convinced myself it didn't matter and I'd end up with some in it anyway.

Then after an hour of it on my mind I sent it back, I dropped that much money I should expect better out of the box?
Click to expand...

If it was sharp and doesn't show up in pics i would keep it, at 11 months send it to fixation for a clean, all it cost you is postage and you get a spotless lens back. The canon 17-55 is known as a dust bucket because of it's design it just can't help but draws in dust. Hell, it's how my 24-70 died, some how enough dust got inside and contaminated the electronic and was the reason it died, even if it didn't reach the glass element it still get in there somewhere.
 
Concorde Rules said:
It collects in there anyway. Keep it and send it back at 11 months old.

I didn't bother in the end but up to you really.
Click to expand...

Raymond Lin said:
If it was sharp and doesn't show up in pics i would keep it, at 11 months send it to fixation for a clean, all it cost you is postage and you get a spotless lens back. The canon 17-55 is known as a dust bucket because of it's design it just can't help but draws in dust. Hell, it's how my 24-70 died, some how enough dust got inside and contaminated the electronic and was the reason it died, even if it didn't reach the glass element it still get in there somewhere.
Click to expand...

Yeah I did consider what both of you said, the store rang me and said they understood the issue and it was upto me. I asked about keeping it say 6 months and sending it to canon with the issue but the store said canon would charge me as it's not an L lens and they would say it's acceptable to get dust in there. The store said they would charge me a servicing cost of about £60. So I sent it back.

If the next one is sharp but has a particle in it I won't bother but one of the bits of dust was pretty big and in the middle.
 
p0ss3s3d said:
It's rubbish. AF is poor ad it's Nikon. :p

(seriously it's pretty poor considering the price tag)
Click to expand...

It's 8 years old - it was the first ever VR lens Nikon produced so fitting in AF-S as well might have been a stretch too far. It's expensive yeah but optically it's the equal of the Canon 100-400 at almost exactly the same price, it's just the AF which lets it down which is poor in a £1100 bit of glass admittedly and the reason I wouldn't buy one. It's due for replacement certainly...
 
And all are far less advanced than a wide range tele zoom with VR - the optical part stands up just fine, as you'd expect but you only need to look at the difference between even VR and VRII lenses to see how far that tech has come in only the last 5 years. I'm not a huge fan of the 80-400, even for AF it's geared very slowly which is an odd decision but as the first VR lens I think some compromises were inevitable...
 
p0ss3s3d said:
My 17-35L is 15 years old and 300mm f/2.8 non-is is 20 years old.

(waits for someone with really old sharp MF glass worth ££££'s!)
Click to expand...

My Contax Carl Zeiss T* lenses (17-35, 24-85 and 70-200, all AF) are also old, and bear no resemblance to bear bottles ... :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom