Kirislin

I think I've made my decision. You shall have to wait until I've been, bought and photographed. watch this space. Oh and I just found this written by Ashanali a couple of days ago for others thinking about these lenses. the price difference between the 1.2, 1.4 and 1.8 is due to many factors (if you are talking about Canon). The 1.2 is an L series lens. These are top of the line, with high quality glass 1.4 is also high quality but a step down from the 1.2 and doesn't have that lovely 'L' tag attached. (whilst I would love a 1.2 the actual difference in output is negligible between the two. I bought the 1.4 ) the 1.8 is very lightweight and cheaply made. Lots of plastic. A great lens for those shooting on a budget.

correct, but I am in Melbourne.

thanks Tess, I think everyone else must be hotfootin' to to HN

so, if you could afford to would you buy the 1.4 or is the 1.8 good enough.

136 after haggling. if you can get it cheaper let me know.

I'm getting itchy! cant wait! been pricing for "in stock" and I am sorry to say HN can do the 1.8 cheapest. It's comparable to the online stores once they include shipping costs.

Is the difference worth the $$ you have to spend? I understand the 1.8 is very plasticky but how much difference in the results. Has anyone used both?

I can dream. sigh

Ooooooh yeah baby! I'd like a few for Christmas. thanks Luke.

just as the heading says. What are the L lenses in the Canon range.

come on now, surely you've got some questions to ask yourself, I might learn something from yours, and then you can look like the dummy!

thanks BlenheimBoy, yep I might have missed your point initially. I understand I would do better if I had a tripod or at least a stable surface, my tripod was me sitting on the floor resting my arms on my knees . and thankyou GayleK, Ashanali and Chezzyr for explaining about the focus probs in low light, I am relieved my camera isn't faulty.

Possibly, but that wasn't my concern here as much as the fact the camera couldn't find the focus, it kept searching back and forth and then fired off a shot when it was completely out of focus. I dont mean this particular photo, this one I manually focussed. I deleted all the other ones.

thanks for your advice and explanations everyone. Yep Chezzyr, I suppose I sort of did work around it by flicking manual focus, even though my eyes aren't the best and I didn't get it exactly right. It's all a learning experience.

actually this pic was manually focussed by me so it looks like even I couldn't get it exactly right.

I dont know if there is something wrong with my camera or is it just the way I am using it. Yesterday afternoon I was playing/experimenting with my Canon taking pics inside in fairly dim conditions (cloudy outside and about 5.50pm) I increased the ISO to 1600 and took some pics of Feather. Although there appears to be enough light to me the camera couldn't focus, it kept searching for the focus, it would go back and forth, I'd see Feather in focus for a moment but the camera went past it several times and eventually fired off completely out of focus. this happened a few times, the only way I got the pic here was by flicking the lens onto manual and focussing it myself, the camera just couldn't do it. so is it me expecting too much or is the camera dodgy and do I need to get it seen to?

Thankyou Persephone, I shall wade through it. I think we should start another forum here: ask Persephone :cool: cause you just about always can point me in the right direction.

I feel dumb fessing up but my manual doesn't explain this and I still dont really understand all the specifics of lenses. I'm getting a handle on f/stops but what exactly does the 18-55 and 75-300 mean on my two kit lenses? Yes I understand one is a zoom, that, putting it simply, brings far away things close, but I dont really understand the figures, other than knowing they're measurments. the lens a few of you speak highly of and I think I want, 50m 1.8, is it so different from the 50 1.4 which is hundreds of $$ more? Why the huge difference. And I see alot of lenses that dont seem to vary alot and yet there seems to be a specific purpose for all of them. I want to be able to understand what I am reading when I trawl the for sales but with all the numbers and letters I am just bewildered and feeling very much out of my depth :cool:

I think you'd be better off asking this in the photography section. There's some really clever people in there who know their stuff.

What about contacting greyhound trainers and seeing who they use.

Aha! you've reminded me of a bloke I know who had a deerhound with similar problems. He too had to have an operation and also had to be desexed, he is fine now, I hope the outcome is the same for your boy.

it's strange that two of you have said desexing will solve the problem because Oscar is already desexed. He's not a horny type dog either, he doesn't hump dogs very often. Anyway I will get my friend to read what's been said here and I think she will probably consider an op for poor Oscar.

Aha! thankyou, this is exactly what I thought needs to be done. It makes sense So it has an official name. I cant help wondering if it's not to do with early neutering, because he wasn't fully developed before getting the chop. I dont know though for sure, it's just my suspicion.

circumcision is sort of what I suspect he needs, well not exactly, I think the opening needs to be made bigger but I just dont know if that's something vets do to dogs.