On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 09:56:58AM -0700, Manny wrote: >We all know that these lense are very expensive, heavy, and (lest we >forget) extremely specialized. I'm amazed that avocational photographers >purchase them. Sadly, because of their bulk and overall inconvience of use, >they quickly become more topics of conversation and trophies than everyday >tools. > >The questions that a potential buyer of "Big Iron" must ask are: Do I >really need a 20lb camera rig? Do I need the extra stop of speed? It is >economically feasable to make that expenditure? > >It sums up as-- Do I really need that lens?
If it comes down to "need", I don't need a camera at all. I often feel sad for people who do photography as a business instead of a hobby. Work isn't supposed to be fun, no matter how much you enjoy your job. Lots of professionals are still plugging away on a 10D because it still works and they already have one and it makes no business sense to buy a new one. I just bought a gigantic lens and paid $500 more than I could have because I wanted to buy it from a company I like (their willingness to chat with me on the phone for half an hour about a lens I might want to buy despite not making a sale out of the call is very nice). I'm not bound by the harsh mistresses of economics or common sense. For me it is the voice in the back of my head that jumps up and down shouting "SHINY OBJECT SHINY OBJECT!". So yes, I got the 600mm f/4 because it is bigger and shinier than all the rest. But I also bought it because I go to the zoo almost every week with a 100-400mm IS L and a 1.4x teleconverter and every week I'm pissed off at the lions for being too far away to get a good picture, and at the hippopotamus for laying in the far side of the pool, and at the flamingos for replacing the penguins (though a new lens won't help that problem). I'm also constantly annoyed at the moon for being too small, and too far away. I just love this new lens, though. I suspect that it will be attached to my camera for weeks before I grow tired of it. Just wandering around my house photographing things at f/4 and minimum focusing distance seems like it will provide unlimited entertainment for me. I own a handful of lenses: 20mm f/2.8 50mm f/1.8 100mm macro f/2.8 200mm f/2.8 L 600mm f/4 IS L 24mm-70mm f/2.8 L 100mm-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS L The only lens I don't use on an almost weekly basis is the 50mm f/1.8. Now that I have the 600mm, my list of "to buy" lenses (in order) is down to merely: 400mm f/2.8 IS L 16mm-35mm f/2.8 mkII L 85mm f/1.2 mkII L 70mm-200mm f/2.8 IS L 50mm f/1.2 L And I really just like taking snapshots. Too much work is involved in taking a "great" picture. I'm happy with a picture that is focused and not too many peoples heads are cut off. >Regardless of what's been said on this thread, no one (not even Caifornia's >Governer Arnold) can hand hold these lenses. Sure, they can be propped on >something, used on a monopod (my choice in almost all cases), or used on a >heavy duty tripod with differing results. I had always planned to prop it up on something or use a tripod/monopod, but it is suprisingly light and manageable compared to what I was expecting. Hand holding is feasable for short bursts, but not pleasant. -- void *(*(*schlake(void *))[])(void *); * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
