On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:16:17AM -0800, Chip Louie wrote: >I prefer to get paid for my efforts. To get paid I need lenses and
You get paid for this? How novel! A couple of nights ago I sicked a jhead|grep|awk against my file server to tally up the exposure times of all my digital pictures. It told me that I've been a digital photographer for almost 6 hours. Tossing in the costs of various cameras, lights, lenses, and accessories that I've bought, I find that being a digital photographer costs me about $2000 an hour. To put that cost per hour into a pointless perspective, according to the local newspaper's police blotter a hooker goes for 2 sacks of potatoes. I avoid 3rd party lenses because I know that Canon tries to make them incompatable, and I'd rather avoid that. For the most part, Canon has almost everything I want in their own line, and I feel the L class glass is far superior to any 3rd party leses. The third party 6mm fisheye is about the only lens I want that Canon doesn't come close too. If I started going for the super long telephoto I would first try adding a 1.4x or 2.0x teleconverter to my 100-400L, but beyond that I'd probably venture into the cheaper alternatives than the big white whales (or are they elephants?) -- void *(*(*schlake(void *))[])(void *); * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
