HOME | DD

TThealer56 In reply to weida34 [2011-01-05 01:45:47 +0000 UTC]

Thanks so much!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

TThealer56 In reply to Corvidae65 [2010-11-27 07:55:37 +0000 UTC]

I think it's cyclical with the butterflies. We had some, but not as many as last year.

I've been working on the sharpness thing for a while now. I didn't do any software sharpening on these shots. I did shoot them with that 16~85mm Nikkor. I've also been finding the manual override is helpful.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Corvidae65 In reply to TThealer56 [2010-12-11 19:33:26 +0000 UTC]

We had a plethora of small butterflies this year--lots of different colors but most all of them were 1 inch or less across and very hard to capture That little blue one I posted is about the best shot I got

I *almost* bought a Sigma 120-300 f2.8 lens the other day in a pawn shop here. It's a $3,000 lens they were selling for $600. The autofocus didn't work but that could be fixed. I had the money to buy but something didn't feel right about the deal and I walked away. The lens was compatible with my D90 according to Sigma (I called them and asked ) and weighed about a ton but it did take a nice sharp picture when I tried it out on my camera using manual focus. They wouldn't let me fiddle with it much and that's what I think turned me off the deal

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

TThealer56 In reply to Corvidae65 [2010-12-11 21:13:20 +0000 UTC]

I can't say as I blame you. A long lens like that in a pawn shop with a busted autofocus motor? Shake it and see if it rattles, btw... If it does it's probably unrepairable.

How much did Sigma say it would cost to get it fixed? If Sigma can fix it for a hundred or so, I'd go back in with 4 $100 bills cash in my hand, offer it to them and say. "I'll offer $400 right now, right here, or you can sit on that lens for a long, long time, busted like that, it's not worth anymore than 4 bills." Think of it this way. You're not getting a warranty. You're going to need to send it to Sigma for repair and calibration. In it's current condition, honestly, it's not worth the powder and lead to blow it up with. Finally, they didn't give the person who brought it in squat for it. Without a fully functional autofocus system, you will drive yourself crazy trying to shoot wildlife with it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Corvidae65 In reply to TThealer56 [2010-12-12 00:13:35 +0000 UTC]

I did talk them down from $800. I used the 'I have to send it in for repairs' on them, but they figured it was afantastic deal the way it was so they wouldn't go any further down. Sigma wouldn't give an estimate over the phone. Can't say I blame them much. I did grntly shake the lens some and no rattles. I thought about buying it and taking the chance it could be repaired kind of cheaply but decided that I could better use the money for a new lens sometime--one with no problems and a warranty

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

TThealer56 In reply to Corvidae65 [2010-12-12 04:42:02 +0000 UTC]

I agree. Personally, the 70~300 F4 VR Nikkor would be a better deal. Yes, it's only an f4 lens, but as we talked before, the higher ISO on the D90 can offset that quite a bit. No, a broken lens is not a fantastic deal. The used camera gear market is screwed. I have that 80~200mm f2.8 that I paid $1100.00 for on sale and if I went to sell it, I couldn't get more than $400 at absolute best. It's in perfect working condition, no usage marks whatsoever. No, I'd let them keep it, and give them my number when they want to move it for $300. Yes, I said $300. Offer them $400, then if they turn you down, give them you card and tell them to call you when they want to move it for $300. They'll probably stop you before you get to the door and take the $400 cash. If not, screw them, you didn't need it that bad. The jerks probably got it in a bundled deal anyway, went and looked up the new price on it and think they really have something! I feel sorry for the poor photographer that had to sell off his gear!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0