![]() |
|
![]() |
![]()
Post
#1
|
|
Experienced Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Advanced Members Posts: 1,936 Joined: 26-September 05 From: Youngstown, OH Member No.: 896 ![]() |
Howdy,
http://www.maracing.com/wheels/ Folks, the camera hobby is overtaking my need to keep these wheels/tires I bought from Kevin a while back. I got them because they were a good deal and I figured I might want to use them. So far, no plans to do so, I'm still playing with the car on 17x9.5's and probably will continue to do so for track stuff. On the other hand, I really want to go buy a Sigma 70-200 lens for my canon... :-) So they're for sale. These are the normal silver replicas, 17x11, straight/true, a couple cone marks, etc. They currently have some nearly gone 315 s04's on them. I'd like to get $550, not including shipping. In a week and a half, I'll be heading out to the Peru Tour and can deliver anywhere between here and there. If you want just the wheels, I can remove the tires to save on shipping costs, but the price is still $550. Email me at mark at sccaprepared dot com. Thanks! Mark This post has been edited by marka: May 29 2006, 06:43 PM |
|
|
![]() |
![]()
Post
#2
|
|
North of the border ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Admin Posts: 2,307 Joined: 4-February 04 From: Montreal, CANADA Member No.: 177 ![]() |
the cropping factor won't make it equivalent of a higher mm lense... it doesn't change the compression... the 1.6x is only for zoom-in.
by taking a pic @ 50mm, then only taking half of it and then make it twice as big by a simple resize, doesn't make that a 100mm pic... it's so weird how they use wrongful terms to get sales. Anyways... I have a 80-200 f/2.8 and find myself using a doubler, making the lense a 160-400 f/5.6 So I would rather have a 120-300 rather than a 80-200... the 80-120 loss for the gain in the 200-300 is worthed, even with a 1-stop loss. I'm considering getting a sigma 300-800 f/5.6 (known as the sigmonster) after all, when I'm in the 200-400 with my 80-200 f/2.8 + doubler, I'm photographying @ f/5.6 anyways. So having 1 body with the 80-200 and another w/ the 300-800 makes it for a perfect match. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) But that lense is bloody expensive. Anyways... unless you are going to get a high mm telephoto lense, your best bang would be the 120-300mm imho, especially if you do sporting events, such as cars. you can always crop pix anyways afterwords... that's why higher resolution comes in handy... but you can't get more "equivalent mm" by croping factors... that's bs, imho... like the weather ppl saying that it's 10'F outside and the wind makes the temperature be @ -10'F BS... temperature is still 10'F... it feels colder because the wind removes the dissipated heat faster.... anyways... pet-peeves... (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/rotf.gif) oh... sorry to hijack... good luck on selling the wheels so you can get the lense |
|
|
![]() ![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 1st June 2025 - 02:22 PM |