DSLR Owners Unite! (56k? Are you kidding me?)

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Mar 25, 2009 | 03:28 PM

#5121

CarbonXe

Senior Member

teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member

iTrader: (1)

Joined: Mar 2007

Posts: 16,638

From: Parsippany, NJ

Quote:

Originally Posted by O5_TRD_tC

how many of you guys are shooting with a 50mm?

I heard they're built poorly and it can break. Any suggestions?

You have to take into consideration that people will tend to write negative reviews more often that write positive ones. Most people won't go out of their way to compliment a product or seller if they're satisfied, but they will go out of their way to bash the living ____ out of something. I tend to ignore reviews made by the general public and tend to look for common malfunctions, etc.

Get the 50mm. It's the best budget lens available.

Mar 25, 2009 | 03:30 PM

#5122

goingcarcrazy

Senior Member

SL Member

Joined: May 2005

Posts: 337

I guess it's kinda lucky that the only thing I use my 50mm 1.8 for is to reverse it on the front of a 100mm macro...

Mar 25, 2009 | 03:40 PM

#5123

DonNguyen

Senior Member

SL Member
Scion Evolution

Joined: Sep 2007

Posts: 2,657

From: San Diego (4s king)

take care of a lens and it will take care of you....

i've had mine for almost 3 yrs now and have never had a problem with it...

Mar 25, 2009 | 03:47 PM

#5124

djafropiq

Senior Member

SL Member

Joined: Aug 2006

Posts: 510

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluaeon

yep... just take care of your gear and it'll take care of you... although, now i am lusting over the new 35 1.8 by nikon or the 24-70 2.8.... drool... downside is 24-70 is at least $1k... used.

soon, i tell yah, soon!!! you will be mine! hahaha

save up for the 24-70.. or even the 28-70.. its worth it.. the 35mm is a nice little lens but if your going with that size.. cough up the extra 100 bucks or so for the 35 2.0.. better IQ, bokeh, sharpeness, everything... i like mine.. but i would be much happier with the 2.0

Mar 25, 2009 | 04:19 PM

#5125

Jon

Moderator

SL Member
Moderator

Joined: May 2006

Posts: 8,124

From: Atlanta, GA

Mar 25, 2009 | 04:45 PM

#5126

DonNguyen

Senior Member

SL Member
Scion Evolution

Joined: Sep 2007

Posts: 2,657

From: San Diego (4s king)

can we set a minimum dimensions? there's a lack of detail when images are posted that small

Mar 25, 2009 | 04:57 PM

#5127

miketf1

Senior Member

SL Member

Joined: Sep 2007

Posts: 1,303

From: Millbrae|SF|SJSU, CA

i think the only reason why we post the small images is cause thats what flickr calls medium and many people use flickr.. if you want we can just call a rule saying you have to post flickr's large or above 1000px long edge?

Mar 25, 2009 | 04:57 PM

#5128

kiss_kiss_kill

Senior Member

SL Member

Joined: Aug 2006

Posts: 4,861

From: 818 yeahhhh!!!!!

I think you're on crack, Donito! They all look fine to me.

If we post pics too big, it's going to jack the tables of the forum.

Mar 25, 2009 | 04:58 PM

#5129

miketf1

Senior Member

SL Member

Joined: Sep 2007

Posts: 1,303

From: Millbrae|SF|SJSU, CA

hdr! btw photomatix owns me. and this is flickr's large..

Mar 25, 2009 | 05:07 PM

#5130

Ace83

Senior Member

Ronin Scion
SL Member
Premium Member

iTrader: (6)

Joined: Aug 2006

Posts: 11,117

From: TX

is the flickr medium size fine? sometimes i want to be friendly for those using laptopns so i use medium..

oh i love starbucks

Mar 25, 2009 | 05:07 PM

#5131

DonNguyen

Senior Member

SL Member
Scion Evolution

Joined: Sep 2007

Posts: 2,657

From: San Diego (4s king)

i'd rather have messed up tables than not be able to see the detail of an image...

Mar 25, 2009 | 05:29 PM

#5132

djafropiq

Senior Member

SL Member

Joined: Aug 2006

Posts: 510

i concur.. large from flickr.. dont you guys wanna show off your shots?

Mar 25, 2009 | 05:39 PM

#5133

kiss_kiss_kill

Senior Member

SL Member

Joined: Aug 2006

Posts: 4,861

From: 818 yeahhhh!!!!!

Ace, I think that shot's way too orange =/

Mar 25, 2009 | 05:40 PM

#5134

djafropiq

Senior Member

SL Member

Joined: Aug 2006

Posts: 510

i think that was his intention..

Mar 25, 2009 | 05:44 PM

#5135

CarbonXe

Senior Member

teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member

iTrader: (1)

Joined: Mar 2007

Posts: 16,638

From: Parsippany, NJ

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace83

is the flickr medium size fine? sometimes i want to be friendly for those using laptopns so i use medium..

oh i love starbucks

[img]https://farm3.static.flickr.com/2055/2210614575_3068c298a8_b.jpg[img]

I'm on a laptop and that looks fine. I don't have to scroll over or aynthing. The medium shots look tiny on my laptop, and they look like icons on my iMac.

Mar 25, 2009 | 05:47 PM

#5136

kiss_kiss_kill

Senior Member

SL Member

Joined: Aug 2006

Posts: 4,861

From: 818 yeahhhh!!!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by djafropiq

i think that was his intention..

I'm sure, but seems like overkill.

Mar 25, 2009 | 05:47 PM

#5137

miketf1

Senior Member

SL Member

Joined: Sep 2007

Posts: 1,303

From: Millbrae|SF|SJSU, CA

i think for flickr it goes medium=500px long edge, large 1024px long edge..

i think large would work for landscape photos on a widescreen but what about portrait photos? youll be scrolling down and down to see the whole pic.. unless you have a 1600x1200 screen..

Mar 25, 2009 | 06:33 PM

#5138

RnB180

Senior Member

SL Member

Joined: May 2007

Posts: 1,803

From: Smallville, Kent farm

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonNguyen

Quote:

Originally Posted by RnB180

Quote:

Originally Posted by O5_TRD_tC

I read this on amazon

"I put this brand new Canon 50mm lens on my Canon XSI body and took some really good portrait shots. Unfortunately, when I wanted to switch back to my zoom lens, I found out that the lens was stuck on the XSI body. It turned half way and it would not turn further. I was lucky that camera and lens are still under warranty and Canon was able to help. I was told by Canon that something inside the lens must have come loose or shifted. This should really not happen. In over 20 years of using Canon cameras, this was a scary first... Please inspect your lens carefully and if the locking mechanism looks different from your current lens, or if it does not attach very smoothly right away, return it and do not use it.
I hope this will help others in the future. "

just nervous i guess hehe

there is nothing on the 50 1.8 that can come loose or shift on the mount.

the mount is plastic however so if you dont install the lens straight and turn it, the cameras metal mount will cut into the 50 1.8 plastic mount and get stuck.

this however is a silly mistake, anyone that does this, doesnt know how to use the camera properly. Also dangerous is that the shavings can drop inside and unto the sensor.

really? which is why i've seen only the mount of the 50 1.8 stuck on a camera?

yes, mounts can come loose; however, it is not very common and under certain circumstances, it will happen..

I not sure what you mean, the 50 1.8 mount is a solid piece of plastic, I dont see what can become loose with a single solid piece of molded plastic. are your referring to the tiny screw holding the contacts? Im more prone to believe the mount was installed crooked and the plastic cut.

Mar 25, 2009 | 06:56 PM

#5139

bluaeon

Senior Member

SL Member

Joined: Oct 2006

Posts: 748

From: 909 CA

Quote:

Originally Posted by djafropiq

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluaeon

yep... just take care of your gear and it'll take care of you... although, now i am lusting over the new 35 1.8 by nikon or the 24-70 2.8.... drool... downside is 24-70 is at least $1k... used.

soon, i tell yah, soon!!! you will be mine! hahaha

oh yeah! im sure it'll take me some time to save up for that 24-70... i have also been looking around for a good used 35 2.0 but cant find any for a good price... soon. hehe..

as for limiting picture size... i always use 900 pixel... maybe we should have a limit of at least 900 pixel... it its larger than that, it will be hard to view it properly. flickrs medium size of 500 is way too small for some pictures, but if theres not much details to look at the picture, then 500 would be sufficient.

Mar 25, 2009 | 07:06 PM

#5140

djafropiq

Senior Member

SL Member

Joined: Aug 2006

Posts: 510

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluaeon

Quote:

Originally Posted by djafropiq

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluaeon

yep... just take care of your gear and it'll take care of you... although, now i am lusting over the new 35 1.8 by nikon or the 24-70 2.8.... drool... downside is 24-70 is at least $1k... used.

soon, i tell yah, soon!!! you will be mine! hahaha

oh yeah! im sure it'll take me some time to save up for that 24-70... i have also been looking around for a good used 35 2.0 but cant find any for a good price... soon. hehe..

check on fred miranda or nikonians.. ive see them go for about 250.. which i think is worth it.. the lens focuses closer and faster than the 1.8 does.. not sure if that matters to you or not..

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Show Printable Version

Email this Page