Flash Me...

A place for Jay to post many pictures of empty warehouses as well as other to post pictures and discuss the geekier aspects of photography.

Moderator: ben306

Flash Me...

Postby Marcus » Sat Jan 09, 2010 11:36 pm

Think I need a flash unit before buying a 70-300 lens for my 400D, does anything compare to the Canon 430ex unit? Or do I need to spend the money and get a 430ex?

Opinions please :D
Marcus
 
Posts: 3760
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:00 am
Reputation point: 0

Postby IanB20 » Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:22 pm

Image
A study shows that men judge women in milli-seconds. Guilty. It can be so quick the image hasn't even fully downloaded :pmsl:
User avatar
IanB20
Junior Member
 
Posts: 3731
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 7:34 pm
Location: deep inside Cliodci's ginger wife
Reputation point: 10

Postby Tweedie » Tue Jan 12, 2010 10:04 pm

430 ex II ??
Image


I Might Have What You Want Just Ask
User avatar
Tweedie
 
Posts: 3419
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:48 am
Location: Here and There
Reputation point: 0

Postby simon justin nixon » Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:26 am

I think I've got the 430ex. It's a cracking little unit mate.

Which 70-300 are you getting? I've got the Sigma one, it's got a macro setting on it too. Superb lens and excellent value for cash. Not sure why you'd need one before that though? My flash gun came last.
User avatar
simon justin nixon
Junior Member
 
Posts: 35133
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:00 am
Reputation point: 15

Postby Jaffa » Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:13 pm

300mm lenses are for losers unless you're getting an f/2.8 or better.

Tamron are wank.

Sigma are a little less wank, but still wank.
User avatar
Jaffa
 
Posts: 9210
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:00 am
Location: Manchester
Reputation point: 10

Postby simon justin nixon » Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:21 pm

Sorry, all hail Jaffa.

Have you owned a sigma 70-300?
User avatar
simon justin nixon
Junior Member
 
Posts: 35133
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:00 am
Reputation point: 15

Postby Jaffa » Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:34 pm

Mike H wrote:Sorry, all hail Jaffa.

Have you owned a sigma 70-300?


No, but someone at work has a Sigma 70-300 and it's crap. The image quality is terrible, very cheap glass and the macro function does work but because at full zoom it's f/5.6 you get a crap shutter speed and fuck loads of camera shake.
User avatar
Jaffa
 
Posts: 9210
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:00 am
Location: Manchester
Reputation point: 10

Postby simon justin nixon » Thu Jan 14, 2010 9:37 am

Jaffa wrote:No


Thought not.

Some of my best images have come with the macro function. Unless you think you're David Bailey, then the 70-300 represents excellent value for money. The shutter speed isn't really that big a deal, is it.
User avatar
simon justin nixon
Junior Member
 
Posts: 35133
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:00 am
Reputation point: 15

Postby Marcus » Thu Jan 14, 2010 9:29 pm

Mike H wrote:I think I've got the 430ex. It's a cracking little unit mate.

Which 70-300 are you getting? I've got the Sigma one, it's got a macro setting on it too. Superb lens and excellent value for cash. Not sure why you'd need one before that though? My flash gun came last.


Be the sigma one as well fella when I have the available funds 8)

I have been researching elsewhere and chatting to dead Sy and he reckons stick with Canon for the flash unit and whatever Sy's says is correct :pmsl:
Marcus
 
Posts: 3760
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:00 am
Reputation point: 0

Postby Jaffa » Tue Jan 19, 2010 1:37 pm

Mike H wrote: then the 70-300 represents excellent value for money.


Yes value for money.

That being it's a very cheap lens and it's a very poor lens.
User avatar
Jaffa
 
Posts: 9210
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:00 am
Location: Manchester
Reputation point: 10


Return to Photography Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron