24-70 DSLR lens recommendations (Page 2): There are few folks on this site who have consistently been more knowledgeable, helpful and positive than Shooter. Like he said, if it's...

doduce Loc: Holly Springs NC

TJer wrote:

Shooter just because your right and he's wrong doesn't mean you have to beat a man verbally for trying. That's no different than being a bully. I bet you'd never, ever think of treating a man in your shop the way you treated Craig here for sharing misinformation. This forum is about learning and having fun doing it, not having someone beat you up for trying. I'm done with you and your kind of "help".

There are few folks on this site who have consistently been more knowledgeable, helpful and positive than Shooter. Like he said, if it's wrong, it's wrong and, in times when purchases can be made in a matter of minutes, OP needs to get the correct information quickly and unambiguously. And for those like Moles, wouldn't you agree that there's a HUGE difference between a typo and totally erroneous info for someone who is about to make a serious purchase?

TJer Loc: Colorado

doduce wrote:

There are few folks on this site who have consistently been more knowledgeable, helpful and positive than Shooter. Like he said, if it's wrong, it's wrong and, in times when purchases can be made in a matter of minutes, OP needs to get the correct information quickly and unambiguously. And for those like Moles, wouldn't you agree that there's a HUGE difference between a typo and totally erroneous info for someone who is about to make a serious purchase?

Of course it can but it can also be related with tact, and sensitivity.

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

One of the things I like about this site is that helpful people like MTShooter are direct and to the point. If your skin is thin maybe this isn't a site that you can benefit from. His response is mild compared to some. Not everything comes candy wrapped.

TJer wrote:

Of course it can but it can also be related with tact, and sensitivity.

TJer Loc: Colorado

DavidPine wrote:

One of the things I like about this site is that helpful people like MTShooter are direct and to the point. If your skin is thin maybe this isn't a site that you can benefit from. His response is mild compared to some. Not everything comes candy wrapped.

That's crap David and you know it! It's that kind of complacency with people who feel that they can treat people with that kind of disrespect, like you, who are the enablers. "Gee if no-one is going to say boo about how rudely I treat people then I'll just keep it up until someone does". Someone has to draw a line in the sand and say "no thanks". And since it would seem that we don't have a moderator here that will do it for us, then we should all stand up to the bullies that think it's O.K. to treat people like crap here. Just because you won't Dave, doesn't mean we have to accept it!

doduce Loc: Holly Springs NC

DavidPine wrote:

One of the things I like about this site is that helpful people like MTShooter are direct and to the point. If your skin is thin maybe this isn't a site that you can benefit from. His response is mild compared to some. Not everything comes candy wrapped.

Amen. If you are wrong--factually incorrect, not having a different opinion--don't whine when somebody points it out.

doduce Loc: Holly Springs NC

TJer wrote:

That's crap David and you know it! It's that kind ... (show quote)

You've been a member for three weeks and have 17 posts--no one can expect you to have a sense of perspective on the UHH community. You will eventually and you may become a knowledgeable, helpful contributor. In your PM days, was your first thought always about how sensitive everyone else was when you had to tell them they were flat out wrong? I don't remember "being nice" as part of the PMP certification process. Get over it.

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

This isn't a touchy-feely site. This is a site to learn about photography. I have had my hands slapped a number of times for being wrong. I sure as heck remembered why I was wrong and learned something in the process. You haven't seen bullies here because they don't last. For the most part, we are "mature" people seeking information. There are any number of people here who are going to rub you wrong because they call it like they see it. Usually these people are seasoned experts and won't put up with people disbursing wrong information. The moderator is silent but deadly. I've seen a number of people removed for abuse and have been instrumental in a couple of cases. Personally, I don't take someone being direct as a personal attack. You are making a mountain out of a molehill.

CraigFair Loc: Santa Maria, CA.

MT Shooter wrote:

Craig, br You obviously have no clue what you are ... (show quote)

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Please re-read my first sentence.

Anandnra Loc: Tennessee

I post very rarely but follow the discussions regularly and I must say that MT has been a tremendous source of help to many on this forum - helping and being free with his expert advice. His reply may sound curt to some but that is his way. He is right in his facts so let's just move on - no harm done.

skiman Loc: Ventura, CA

CraigFair wrote:

Nikon Lens is a FX Full Frame Lens and will have a crop factor of 1.5x = 32-105mm f/3.5 or f/4 not quite sure which f/#
Tamron Lens is a DX C-Fame Lens and will be a true 24-70mm f/2.8
Your camera is a DX C-Frame
Craig

The field of view will be 32-105mm on an APS-C sensor but it will still be an f/2.8 lens.

Wrbeng65 Loc: Tennessee

OK guys, I didn't intend to cause anything to go viral. Just wanted a comparison of the two lenses. Thus far, I have seen significant support for the nikon lens, but not much has been said about the tamron with its version of vibration reduction. I would like more lens specific info, please.

skiman Loc: Ventura, CA

Wrbeng65 wrote:

OK guys, I didn't intend to cause anything to go viral. Just wanted a comparison of the two lenses. Thus far, I have seen significant support for the nikon lens, but not much has been said about the tamron with its version of vibration reduction. I would like more lens specific info, please.

From what I have read, the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 is better than the Tamron and the 70-200 f/2.8 Tamron is better then the same Sigma. The Nikon f/2.8s are better than both Tamron and Sigma but at double the price. However the Nikon lenses will hold their value better.

doduce Loc: Holly Springs NC

skiman wrote:

From what I have read, the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 is better than the Tamron and the 70-200 f/2.8 Tamron is better then the same Sigma. The Nikon f/2.8s are better than both Tamron and Sigma but at double the price. However the Nikon lenses will hold their value better.

Ahhhh. A voice of sanity speaks, finally pulling us out of the unseemly quagmire. Thanks you, kind sir.

doduce Loc: Holly Springs NC

Suppose Shooter had said "You are absolutely incorrect," then continued on with his post exactly as is? Would you still have your knickers in a twist? If NO, let it go. If YES, you have other issues.