there is none i believe.

not DSLR related but has anyone used this?
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Insignia...ustomerreviews

 

link not working

 

 

i hate you

 

i know you do. also i have formula drift this weekend so expect lots of photos on Sunday!

 

yea im trying to find a better lens that covers the range but i can't find one listed at least not from nikon. maybe another brand makes a better lens for this range coverage that wouldnt be considered "kit".

and about the camcorder... dude its 80 bucks. that thing is going to SUCK. if it didn't suck, it wouldnt be 80 bucks lol

 

Gamma, the horizon seems off in the second photo.

 

we are on page 666 haha

 

is my pic tilted? i didn't have my tripod. i lay my camera on concrete column for 4 seconds exposure.

 

hahaha i'm just hating because i wanted that lens back when i still had my camera...i'll just get it when i get the 40D

 

maybe by then I'll want to sell it.......or not!

 

Ace, how exactly are Canon's lacking? I can't find a way. They weren't the first to do video on DSLR's but are the best, the glass is HANDS down the best, etc etc.

 

Canon glass FTW. i simply find canon's bodies much easier to hold, navigate, better bcontrol layout, basically jsut more user friendly. When i looked at a D40, it was just wayy to small and hard to understand and get used to. and the lack of an AF motor killed it for me.

 

idk bout u but when I buy a camera I like it to be a nice size and not just a tad bigger than a P&S. ha ha

 

I'm not saying it isn't a versatile lens. It serves a purpose and does it pretty well. But personally if I had that range already covered, I wouldn't consolidate into one lens. I'd rather spend that money on a wide angle for example.

They may have a slightly larger selection, but "best" is subjective.

 

actually BEST is correct. ha ha Most Nikon pros will even tell u that. Selection is a THOUSAND times better. ha ha Canon produces more fast glass than any other company.

 

I've never heard any say that. If that was the case they would have bought one instead of going with a more expensive brand. Economically it wouldn't make sense to spend more money when the better alternative (if that was the case) was cheaper.

And yeah they might make more lenses, but quantity /= quality. I've heard it often said that Canon's L-series is like a signal to consumers that Canon actually put their best effort into those lenses. Whereas Nikon doesn't need to differentiate since that best effort is put into all their lenses. And I don't think I was even on a Nikon site when I read that.

 

This whole Canon > Nikon talk is annoying. Both brands are good in their own regards.

 

I think they both suck. I want a Hassy.

 

idk but i'd put a 50L, 85L, and 135L up against any Nikon, sigma, tamron, tokina lens ANY day ha ha