[genotypewriter]

[quote name='Lomskij' timestamp='1297772448' post='6127']

Like, someone is looking for a long (105+) macro for FF nikon, genotypewriter can't help it: "since the 65mm MP-E is not on nikon",[/quote]

How was it ok for Nikon guys to bring up the 14-24 in every conversation until Canon showed up with the TS-E 17, TS-E 24 and the 24L II? Or the 70-200 VR II until the 70-200 IS II came out? Or for 35 years claim that no one needs a 24 1.4 until the 24 1.4G came out? That's just in the "FX" era, mind you... <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />





[quote name='Lomskij' timestamp='1297772448' post='6127']

Markus enjoying the 200mm f/2 VR, genotypewriter: "Canon 200 f/2L IS is lighter, better, has a killer IS, etc", then 24mm 1.4, another about Canon's 200-400mm Extender 1.4x, etc, etc. Nothing's new here either <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' />

[/quote]

Hello! We're in one of the most popular websites on the internet for comparing lenses (well done Klaus and Marcus!)... why is it wrong for a user in its discussion board to compare lenses? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



GTW