and I think the guy isn't being entirely truthful when he says that Canon can easily clean the fungus out. Sure they can, but it will have etched the glass. Since the lens is long since out of production, what are the chances of getting a replacement element?
I bet people will end up bidding $1k plus for a lens that is basically cactus.
Hey Ed I have a small lens complete with fungus and let me tell you it is the softest , softfocus I've ever used , I still use it with the Ricoh so don't laugh.
I should be able to make the Mardigras but not 100% sure just yet.
I bet people will end up bidding $1k plus for a lens that is basically cactus.
Someone on ebay few days ago paid $850 and bought a secondhand 17-85IS. That's basically how much you pay for a new lens here. Smelly and I were laughing because we both have a 17-85 up for sale. Anyone interested? I will do it for $900 plus shipping to my fellow FM photographers
17-85 is EFS mount but Canon service department can easily remove the mount and replace it with EF
MozzMann wrote:
Hey Ed I have a small lens complete with fungus and let me tell you it is the softest , softfocus I've ever used , I still use it with the Ricoh so don't laugh.
Well, I guess it can have it's uses, but I wouldn't pay good money for a lens with fungus in it. Even if the element(s) could be replaced, it wouldn't be cheap.
The funny thing is that I'm sorta tempted to bid on it. Geez.
Zane Yau wrote:
Likewise, you were online last nite at 2am?! Yeah well, insomnia will do that to you
Zane Yau wrote:
17-85 is EFS mount but Canon service department can easily remove the mount and replace it with EF
I'm betting that someone's gonna try it, metal mount and all.
My 1-4L doesnt get a lot of usage as well, the 70-200 does most of the tele I need, especially when I have my 1.4x with me. Not sure if I should sell the
1-4L!! But it's sharp and it does the job well, IS is excellent when I could get a sharp pic at 1/30s at 400mm(x1.6 if that makes a diff) handheld. But the 70-200 is just a joy to use, although heavier, when its reach is sufficient
If they can convert my 17-85 to EF, then I'd use it.
Yeah, I got my adaptor on Ebay... some photofelix or something.... I love being able to turn the aperture ring manually and seeing the results thru the viewfinder.
ok, thanks. I'll look around. A friend of mine as a nikkor 55 f/1.2 that's been sitting in his camera case for ages (gathering fungus, no doubt), so I'd like to give it a go sometime.
I haven't decided on whether I should sell the following (i've been thinking about it for the last two days):
1. EOS 3 or 30. Bought a secondhand 10D last nite so selling one of them for sure. But I want to at least keep one film body. It's nice to have the EOS 3 but selling the EOS 3 can generate more funds (say $850)
2. 17-85 IS or 28-135IS (the 28-135 is sort of old but it's like my first love. I also want to get my wife into photography so the 28-135 would be light enough for her on a 10D; 17-85 cant be used on 10D)
3. selling the 18-55 efs for sure
4. hmm.....100-400
5. 50 1.8 for 50 1.4 or 85 1.8
1. I think the most you could expect for the EOS 30 is about $400. I think $850 for the EOS 3 is probably a realistic price. So in terms of pure money generation, the EOS 3 is the better choice. If I were you, though, I'd keep the 3 simply because it's a better camera.
2. I'd keep the 28-135 because it's compatible with all current EOS film and digital cameras. Plus it's got a nice range.
4. If the 70-200 covers the range that you mostly use...
5. You can play around with my 85 f/1.8 if that'll help.
I still use it with the Ricoh so don't laugh. 
