jctriguy Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
p.6 #18 · p.6 #18 · Official: 24-70mm f/4L IS and 35mm f/2 IS released! | |
artd wrote:
Ok for that scenario, let's rephrase to the following: If someone is considering purchasing a lens that costs $1500 they can probably afford to buy a new polarizer too. If one has the means and the willingness to spend $1500 on a lens, would $1650 really be such a back breaker?
If the burden of an extra few grams to carry two polarizers is too much, you can also get a step-down ring and leave the smaller polarizer at home (or sell it). If that step down ring is too burdensome to carry...well...then it'd be hard to imagine you'd not be overburdened already by multiple lenses.
And finally, there are some who also have multiple lenses with 82mm threads. (For example my two most-used lenses right now both have 82mm threads). ...Show more →
People are making a pretty big deal about this for some reason. See my other response above, stated the obvious that apparently wasn't so obvious
Try this...you have 77mm lenses already (70-200, 17-40, etc), you are thinking about 24-70 f4 vs f2.8. Total cost would be $2300+new 82mm filters ($2500) vs $1500 and no new filters.
To use your argument another way. Why do people care about having two camera systems. If they can afford multiple 2-10k lenses and carry them around, clearly it would be possible for them to have 2 different camera bodies (Nikon and Canon) and appropriate lenses for both systems. Why all the fuss about Canon not having great UWA, just get a Nikon FF and a 14-24 and keep all your Canon gear and carry both around.
That will solve all the constant debates about what system to use and whether or not someone should jump ship.
Edited on Nov 07, 2012 at 03:05 PM · View previous versions
|