The $100.00 Shot

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree and let me assure you that there are many of us on this board that know exactly what a fast lens is, how large it is (I call mine bricks after having to hike around with them :lol: ) and how expensive the filters for them can be. That stated.... awesome shot! :thumbsup:
 
like Im really sure these moderators and people in here with over 1,000 and 2,000 posts to their names dont know what a fast lens is!!! come on...

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/offer-listing/B00004ZCJI/ref=pd_luc_25_lc_ax33_r3c1_a1_un/102-9491237-4297766?%5Fencoding=UTF8&condition=all"]http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/offer-listing/B00004ZCJI/ref=pd_luc_25_lc_ax33_r3c1_a1_un/102-9491237-4297766?%5Fencoding=UTF8&condition=all[/ame]
adorama and even calumet sell that filter (tiffen) for under 20 bucks.

Also everyone seems to be selling the lens about 300 bucks less too
http://froogle.google.com/froogle?q=nikkor+17-55mm+2.8+ED&hl=en&btnG=Search+Froogle&lmode=unknown

I wonder why all the harshness towards the forum are you upset we didnt all ger duped into buying 18 dollar filters for 200.00 ?
 
Ahhh. Shhh.
Folks.
Let's leave this...

I come here to say: wow, that is dedication! To do this for "THE" hoped for photo of light trails as seen from below. Cool idea!!! I would not have thought about possible damage to whichever glass, either, I'm afraid. But then I have never so far gone as far as you did with this photo (only do I drive deeply into the woods, get stuck there, and need to hike to the nearest farm to ask the farmer to come and tow me out of the quagmire with his tractor, that is all I do...).

(And my polarizer costed me - in D-Mark times - DM 99.- ... just for general information - at that time it would have been about U$ 75.-)
 
THORHAMMER,

I'm pretty sure I'm wasting my time replying to you but this will be my last on this thread on that matter. I'm not really sure what your point is with your links. I have many 58mm filters that are cheap. I never said it was a 58mm. Not to mention that Tiffen 58mm is not multicoated either. As for your second link, when the lens first came out, it was priced around 1499.00 now yes, you can get it for 1200.00.

Scott

THORHAMMER said:
like Im really sure these moderators and people in here with over 1,000 and 2,000 posts to their names dont know what a fast lens is!!! come on...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/offer-listing/B00004ZCJI/ref=pd_luc_25_lc_ax33_r3c1_a1_un/102-9491237-4297766?%5Fencoding=UTF8&condition=all
adorama and even calumet sell that filter (tiffen) for under 20 bucks.

Also everyone seems to be selling the lens about 300 bucks less too
http://froogle.google.com/froogle?q=nikkor+17-55mm+2.8+ED&hl=en&btnG=Search+Froogle&lmode=unknown

I wonder why all the harshness towards the forum are you upset we didnt all ger duped into buying 18 dollar filters for 200.00 ?
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
nothing to get your feathers all ruffled........I am used to canon lenses, so I picked the wrong size..., So I was off by 15 bucks, the 77mm's are still only 35.00
[ame="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/offering/list/-/B00007LV61/all/ref=dp_olp_2/102-9491237-4297766?%5Fencoding=UTF8"]http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/offering/list/-/B00007LV61/all/ref=dp_olp_2/102-9491237-4297766?%5Fencoding=UTF8[/ame]

I understand you want to put a good filter on yer lens ok big whooping deal...
but why do you need to condenscendingly insult everyone on the forum including myself claiming we dont know anything about lenses?
Just because someone pays a lot of money for something doesnt mean they have the right to insult others who probably dont have as much money...

I do not know if you meant to insult us, but theres really only one way to take what you said....

sorry if I offended anyone, let me know if I am out of place, I just love this place and when someone totally insults it, i try to defend it ..no big deal.........

this topic is history...
 
MyCameraEye said:
Maybe we can toss Jo over the the arlington bridge into the disgusting river and I can shoot away. I better bring my mono pod for this I guess. Scott :sexywink:

should provide interesting facial shots based on what i saw when he got caught in the middle of bridge traffic the other evening :lmao:

what's with the sexy wink? i'm afraid to show now :greenpbl:
 
Great picture, the best ones usually involve some kind of risk or sponteneity! FWIW, my Nikon 77mm UV cost me £70, so I'm even worse for paying a lot. You can pay whatever you think it's worth for a bit of glass http://www.microglobe.co.uk/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=2064 it's even more expensive here!

Great shot though, and at least it wasn't your primary element. Maybe think about insurance for that kind of equipment accident!!

Rob
 
JonMikal said:
should provide interesting facial shots based on what i saw when he got caught in the middle of bridge traffic the other evening :lmao:

what's with the sexy wink? i'm afraid to show now :greenpbl:

Dude, you think that was bad, you should have seen me yesterday...same place but in rush hour...good think I was wearing brown pants!!!
 
jocose said:
Dude, you think that was bad, you should have seen me yesterday...same place but in rush hour...good think I was wearing brown pants!!!

:lol:
 
I felt the NEED to jusify it being no one knows the costs of REAL filters for REAL lenses
.

-sorry i dont have a real camera or a real lens. I hope maybe you realize the elitist attitude you display by saying that.
 
Say good-bye, thread.

Good-bye, thread!

Keep it friendly at all times, folks, or you lose the privilege to post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Most reactions

Back
Top