Quote:
Originally Posted by stag44
If your not going to do that much photography why go SLR route?
So.. I have saved you ?1600 with that bit of advice... can I have a bonus please or at least a blow job??  |
Well, I will be probably doing 'a lot of photography', just not professionally.
I already have a 'good' non slr-cam but it's lacking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rowan
1) I doubt Jakke will be using manual exposure, at least at the start
|
I most likely will actually, it's one of the features I'm most interested in. I'll probably play around with it a lot, spend countless times fucking it up and then hopefully learn to use it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xenigo
Go with the Canon (NOT SIGMA) 24-70 2.8. Sigma makes some serious garbage. Clunky motors, mechanisms that are flawed, etc. Sigma is like the lens equivalent of a Yugo.
Maybe go with Sigma if you like their trademark "SCREEEEEEETCH, SCREEEEEEEEETCH" when you focus.
|
Damn. I was actually looking at that. Price difference is rather huge. Canon is 1000?+, Sigma is around ?500. After reading this
http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/2470exl I have no idea why I should pay more than double the price for Canon, if I'm not going the "Professional"-route.
Now, which would be better.. Canon "Kit"-lense, or the Sigma 24-70?