Your Camera Equipment

Sold my Nikon 85 mm f1.8 AF-D and put the f1.8 AF-S G on preorder, should be shipping out next month

afs_85_1.8g.jpg
 
^Nice, I've heard many good things about the new 1.8 G, should be better than the old AF-D.
 
nice one evowalo.. in here it costs more than my car.
 
I have Canon EOS 1100D with the almost useless kit 18-55, but luckily I have also Canon ef 70-200mm 4f L usm. I reckon that my next equipment update will be a new body. Thinking of buying Canon 550D at somepoint
 
Taking my next step towards wireless strobe shooting

6787378940_a83be1ab81_z.jpg
 
Just got a 430EX II yesterday night:

canon430exii_frontback.jpg


Been shooting a bit with it and will post results soon.
 
I should get better remotes, the dual channel chinese ones I have are a bit odd at times.
 
About an hour ago I picked up these from my brother who just came home from the US:

P3020154.jpg


All of these comes from www.keh.com, the adapter from B&H. Manual focusing these is actually rather easy with the magnification (not really needed on the 135 though) Looking forward to the release of the OM-D :woot:
 
:drool:

Mother of fast lenses!
Yes, I have tried them just a little bit. The 135/2,8 can really be focused just fine without using the magnification, it's also got very long and precise focusing action and a built in hood. Further more it's very compact for a 135/2,8. Trying out the 50/1,4 I got one thing confirmed: Anyone who says you can't get that all illusive shallow DoF on mFT (of FT for that matter) is full of shit. I was briefly looking a the 50/1,2, but I passed. That 1/2 stop of light from the 50/1,2 wasn't worth paying $650 vs $120 for the 50/1,4. The 35/2 looks like it can be a very nice portrait lens. Funny thing though, the adapter alone is almost as thick as the 35 and 50mm lenses... :p

I was also considering the 85/2, but the only one they had in at the moment was the old one, not the newer multi coated one. I would really like a 90/2 Macro, or 100/2, but both of those are more than $800, and that's (in my opinion) a little bit excessive for legacy glass...
 
Last edited:
Has anyone else noticed that their Nikon rear caps are almost functionally useless after a few years? Mine simply do not hold like they used to; they're very loose when fastened on. The rear cap for my Tokina 11-16 is even worse after less than a year and I think it's the reason why the lens' rear element has a chip :(

The el-cheapo knock-off rear caps I bought on eBay are much more snug and secure than the name-branded ones where new.
 
Last edited:
Has anyone else noticed that their Nikon rear caps are almost functionally useless after a few years? Mine simply do not hold like they used to; they're very loose when fastened on. The rear cap for my Tokina 11-16 is even worse after less than a year and I think it's the reason why the lens' rear element has a chip :(

The el-cheapo knock-off rear caps I bought on eBay are much more snug and secure than the name-branded ones where new.

I won't say that for all of them, but I have noticed inconsistence in locking tightness from cap to cap, don't know, maybe it is an age thing. I was at a trade show recently and bought a bunch of spare SLR body caps, lens front and end caps for $2 apiece, all Nikon branded.
 
Also, on the topic of that lens chip... I want to get it repaired (I checked and it's covered by insurance), but it would drive me nuts to be without this lens for the 4-or-so weeks it would take. I'm seriously considering actually buying a new lens and selling this one when it comes back repaired. Worth it?

Also, Nikon 80-200/2.8 AF-D, new, retail, $1000 CAD. Worth it?
 
I was considering getting an 80-200 AF-D some time ago, I ended up with a 70-200 VR that wasn't pretty cosmetically but worked fine. I'd go with that every time over a new 80-200 purely for AF speed (I seem to remember reports of the 80-200 AF-D being slow). That or you can try and pick up an 80-200 AF-S, more difficult to get hold but but are supposed to be very good indeed.

*EDIT*

I did this quite a few years ago so this probably isn't even slightly current advice. I think there has since been a second version of the 70-200 VR which is supposed to be better. I guess my revised entirely totally objective analysis would be:

70-200 VR II > 70-200 VR >= 80-200 AF-S > 80-200 AF-D
 
Last edited:
I was considering getting an 80-200 AF-D some time ago, I ended up with a 70-200 VR that wasn't pretty cosmetically but worked fine. I'd go with that every time over a new 80-200 purely for AF speed (I seem to remember reports of the 80-200 AF-D being slow).
Eh... I've had too many pieces of camera equipment go wrong to buy an expensive lens without a warranty. I've also tried the 80-200 AF-D and I find the AF speed to be adequate.
 
Also, on the topic of that lens chip... I want to get it repaired (I checked and it's covered by insurance), but it would drive me nuts to be without this lens for the 4-or-so weeks it would take. I'm seriously considering actually buying a new lens and selling this one when it comes back repaired. Worth it?

Also, Nikon 80-200/2.8 AF-D, new, retail, $1000 CAD. Worth it?

I'd wait longer, save up more and get the 70-200 VR1, definitely worth the extra $400-500 or so you can pay for a decent used one.

I rented an old 80-200 AF-D for a safari and once light became less than optimal and shutter speeds started to get longer, the blur on the long end became intolerable.

of course this was handheld and without benefit of a monopod
 
Last edited:
Didn't post this yet, thanks to some great advice by fellow forum members I purchased a D90 :)

IMG-20120303-00291.jpg
 
Top