DSLRUsers.com

Some of these D70 users think they have some nice lenses. Here are mine.

An immpresive collection petel666!

Petal, nice to see a proud Sigma supporter

Another Sigma follower and true believer

hrmmm - just waiting for Gary to say "no wonder you got a Canon - look at yer lenses!"

They are all 2nd hand though so I got to see that they were sharp before I bought them. My own form of Sigma Quality Control.

I see just three lenses, a 2x TC, and a few bottles of Coke.

gstark wrote:I see just three lenses, a 2x TC, and a few bottles of Coke.

Show me your Nikon xxx-300f2.8 zoom?

petal666 wrote:

gstark wrote:I see just three lenses, a 2x TC, and a few bottles of Coke.

Show me your Nikon xxx-300f2.8 zoom?

No.

1: because I don't have one.

2: because I don't have a need for one.

3: because this is a Canon section of the forum,

and ...

4. (most importantly) this is not a pissing contest.

What IS important is that I have glass that I'm satisfied with, and that it satistfies my needs. As long as your glass, be it Canon, Sigma, or O'Brien's, satisfies your needs, nothing else matters.

gstark wrote:....What IS important is that I have glass that I'm satisfied with, and that it satistfies my needs. As long as your glass, be it Canon, Sigma, or O'Brien's, satisfies your needs, nothing else matters.

Then don't come into my thread saying my $2500 lens is a bottle of coke

Alrighty guys... chill.

Dad thinks Sigma's are Coke bottles. It's his opinion.

Nice collection either way, petal666!

Nnnnsic wrote:It's his opinion.

.... or delusion?

It seems to me it's a good advertising for Sigma Optical, not Canon though.
Real Canon brand lens is another story, same as real Nikkor.
Forum has many of members also got the Sigma lens in Nikon mount.
We may have another sector of lens so their owners of all brand can showing off their arsenal and put thru their discussion, though characteristic of the same made is similar to each brand mount, whether it's Nikon or Canon or Pentax, Milnolta etc...
The difference which I can see is quality, features and competitive pricing in between genuine made brands.

Hlop wrote:

Nnnnsic wrote:It's his opinion.

.... or delusion?

Either way it's irrelevant.

Petal: what do you use as your walkaround lens? The 17-40 f/4L?

Petal

You are a bloody disgusting showoff. And I'm jealous - Coke or Pepsi

MCWB wrote:Petal: what do you use as your walkaround lens? The 17-40 f/4L?

I only got the 17-40 last week and until now the 28-70f2.8 was my walkabout. The only way everything (have to leave the 180macro and 2x TC out) fits in my bag is to have the 28-70 on the camera. I haven't really given the 17-40 a good run yet. I'll probably stick with the 28-70 but that might change when I get to use the 17-40 a bit.

Nice collection Petal - both the big C and the big S

petal666,

Nice collection of lenses there.

What do they say, variety is the spice of life

Looks ok to me petal, i too have a sigma in my clan of few lenses. Oh well can we have too many.
Cheers
John
BBJ

Well I do not see anyy thing wrong with using Sigma on a Canon, I have the 80-400 OS lens and will can verify the quality of the results. I actually used the Canon 100 - 400IS lens for a test and could not justify the extra 800 dollars as there was not enough difference in the results, plus I am not a fan of push pull zooms...

Nice line up Petal666, This is my little pack still looking at getting Canons 100-400mm sometime soon



Kevin

I must admit that I do like the grey lenses - they stand out amongst the crowd

Do I need to show off my Nikon and Nikkor armories
Great stuff!

No don't do that Birdie...there's too many of the Nikonians suffering from major lens lust after hearing about your collection.

Birddog114 wrote:Do I need to showing off my Nikon and Nikkor armories
Great stuff!

Come, come - we would need a monitor of approximately 3 metre width

Birddog114 wrote:Do I need to showing off my Nikon and Nikkor armories
Great stuff!

I'd prefer that you didn't, actually.

I don't want this thread to turn into a contest.

gstark wrote:

Birddog114 wrote:Do I need to showing off my Nikon and Nikkor armories
Great stuff!

I'd prefer that you didn't, actually.

I don't want this thread to turn into a contest.

Gary,
Yes, I didn't want to do that also, that why I kept myself quiet and just looking to see what those Canon guys doing

Birddog114 wrote:

gstark wrote:

Birddog114 wrote:Do I need to showing off my Nikon and Nikkor armories
Great stuff!

I'd prefer that you didn't, actually.

I don't want this thread to turn into a contest.

Gary,
Yes, I didn't want to do that also, that why I kept myself quiet and just looking to see what those Canon guys doing

Just between the two of us, I'd prefer that no more such images were posted. It makes the contest side of things become too tempting, and that can only lead to issues.

Gary,
I agreed, I do not want any other the issues either.
It seems to me it will drag both sides into the game like the "Cold War" between the Yanks and the Russian back in the 60.

gstark wrote:

Birddog114 wrote:

gstark wrote:

Birddog114 wrote:Do I need to showing off my Nikon and Nikkor armories
Great stuff!

I'd prefer that you didn't, actually.

I don't want this thread to turn into a contest.

Gary,
Yes, I didn't want to do that also, that why I kept myself quiet and just looking to see what those Canon guys doing

Just between the two of us, I'd prefer that no more such images were posted. It makes the contest side of things become too tempting, and that can only lead to issues.

Bummer...

I was going to post a pic of my Le Creuset pot collection for all out there to envy

gstark wrote:

Birddog114 wrote:

gstark wrote:

Birddog114 wrote:Do I need to showing off my Nikon and Nikkor armories
Great stuff!

I'd prefer that you didn't, actually.

I don't want this thread to turn into a contest.

Gary,
Yes, I didn't want to do that also, that why I kept myself quiet and just looking to see what those Canon guys doing

Just between the two of us, I'd prefer that no more such images were posted. It makes the contest side of things become too tempting, and that can only lead to issues.

Sorry have taken it off, you guys are sure touchy here

It's not really a thing of being touchy, mitedo.

Moreso has to do that some people will feel offended and possibly insecure and the result will be a pissing contest.

Not a good thing to do if we're trying to not follow DPR's example...

Besides, it ain't the equipment, it's the photographer!!!

How is about my collection of flight helmets and flight gears?

Birdy, only when we start http://www.NikonAndGitzoPatronsWhoFlyBigPlanes.com

How many users do you think we'll get?

Birddog114,

Birddog114 wrote:Do I need to show off my Nikon and Nikkor armories
Great stuff!

There is not enough space on the site for that

With all due respect, once Birdie posts a pic of his lenses, the competition is over. That's like me armwrestling Godzilla.

petal,

excellent collection. Like stubbsy said coke or pepsy, its more than enough make one jealous and the lens lust is slowly getting on the nerves. I know birdy is always here but santa is still far away.

By the way the 24-70 is Sigma I take it. If it is could you tell how does it perform ? I have read some conflicting reviews about. I still cant decide whether sigma 24-70 or tamron 28-75 (this one has lots of good reviews)

cheers,
ajax

Besides, it ain't the equipment, it's the photographer!!!

agrees with nnnnsic.

I like another quote from Ken duncan - "If your not using the equipment you have now, you wont use the equipment you want"


JD

I gave the camera to my partner to take photos of me racing in our cycle club road race champs on Saturday morning. She did OK but the photos weren't anything special. Then she gave the camera to a guy who own the 10D. I don't think he knows how to use it cause his photos were sh*t.

Petal,

Just to cross-pollinate threads, I see that the Sigma 180 macro is a big sucker ... not much smaller than the 70-200. Hrm.

Have you used your Sigma 1.4x TC with your 70-200 - no issues? I'll probably get it soon as well, to me there seems no real reason to get the Canon 1.4x TC - the Sigma seems to be its equal, and fits more lenses.

Lastly, why the two different flash systems (Canon and Sunpak)?

DionM wrote:Petal,

Just to cross-pollinate threads, I see that the Sigma 180 macro is a big sucker ... not much smaller than the 70-200. Hrm.

Have you used your Sigma 1.4x TC with your 70-200 - no issues? I'll probably get it soon as well, to me there seems no real reason to get the Canon 1.4x TC - the Sigma seems to be its equal, and fits more lenses.

Lastly, why the two different flash systems (Canon and Sunpak)?

I've hardly ever used any teles on the 70-200, but the 1.4x works fine.

I have a couple of canon flashes and 1 Sigma 500 DG super. By comparison the build quality is crap but it is half the price.

petal666 wrote:I've hardly ever used any teles on the 70-200, but the 1.4x works fine.

I take it you use the 1.4 on the 120-300 then?

I have a couple of canon flashes and 1 Sigma 500 DG super. By comparison the build quality is crap but it is half the price.

Oh okay. Was just wondering the reasoning. I'm planning on getting a multi-flash setup, but will probably get 1 or 2 420EXs - this gives me my 580EX on camera as wireless master, and the 420 as wireless slave. At about $260ea on eBay, they are about half the price of a 580EX.

Yeah, the 1.4x lives on the 120-300.

The only problem with the 420EX's is that there are no manual settings. It may not sound like much when they are slaves but it is handy if you want to overexpose the background of a portrait etc.

petal666 wrote:The only problem with the 420EX's is that there are no manual settings. It may not sound like much when they are slaves but it is handy if you want to overexpose the background of a portrait etc.

Yes, you are right there. Something I have to decide if I really want that feature. Unless I look at a Vivitar 283 or something with an optical trigger, just purely for the background or something like that.

How do you find the 120-300? I'm thinking about the 400 5.6 or maybe the 300 F4 IS with a 1.4x TF soon, but I could perhaps stretch for the 120-300 and get a 1.4x TC for it. What's AF speed - I would be using it for motorsport and birding (which I know that even 420 is a bit short).
I know everyone says that if you want 400, buy 400, not a 300 with a TC

I've never used it for motorsport but the photos here http://eventphotos.com.au/albums/qr280805/fast-yellow/ were taken with my lens and TC. Seems to work OK

Very nice collection of lenses.

petal666
In this forum it's the pictures that count...not the lenses. Please show us your pictures! It's what we are here for.

I've posted images. I'm off to the uni game cycle race tomorrow so should have a few more to post, use a variety of these lenses and test out my 200f2.8 prime.