///M5

the lack of sharpness on both is exclusively due to the tripod. Both shot using the 17-55 2.8 at somewhere near F11 and 17mm. And yes that is the $750 lens that makes the Nikkor $1500 lens just seem WAY overpriced. L quality in picture without the extra expense of materials in the body. I still feel like you haven't spent time shopping for glass if you are still looking at Nikon....or you haven't shared. Albeit years ago when I shopped I realized it was futile in the Nikkor world.

The first shot is from one of the restaurants you see on the right of the second. Boat Quay....right next to where the crazy fucks air condition OUTSIDE.

This as well hung on a bridge

This was shot on a Gorilla pod

Seth there are decent tripods probably for that, but it really depends on the weight of the glass. Just the head of the tripod is normally more than that for a real hunk of glass.... That being said, an el cheapo can work to hold the camera. Just don't expect to take 30 second exposures. I have the big Gorilla pod and have taken some 20sec night time shots that worked pretty good. If you peep there is motion, but I didn't spend $500 yet on a CF one and wasn't carrying a 90lb aluminum one to Singapore.

I use a Ram Mount. Pretty rock solid. Can't say that I have jumped off anything higher than 4', but I regularly get off the ground with it. I have a cheaper one I don't like as much and the Delta is sort of the defacto standard, but for me it doesn't work as I can reach the volume control on the back of the G4 while it is in the Delta. The low profile portion of the Delta is nice though as the Ram sticks up a bunch. I prefer the older Ram holder with the fingers than the new Xgrip but if you have a big phone you have no choice. You definitely need the rubber thingee it comes with though if you ride off road. I did 17mi on the riverbed trails this weekend with mine, never even twitched.

$100, not if you have a real lens. Better to spend the money on glass and not need the tripod. Generically you should be able to hand hold up to 1/focal length.

Any non-prime is a zoom, lol. Not a telephoto

Peaked at the nikkor glass...they are really proud of their crop glass. Holy hell $$

The Sigma 17-50 2.8 actually got pretty reasonable reviews for $400 or so IIRC. That could also be a zoom solution with a 40d...and if you HAD to have ZOOM and spend under $700 would be the choice.

err, wrong. Nikkor 17-55 2.8 is $1500. Yikes. Fuck that. I'd want L glass for that price.

Probably the cheapest zoom solution I could recommend in the Canon line. Pretty sure the Nikon price point will be similar.

If you want a zoom, this: http://www.adorama.com/ca1755u.html and a 40d would be hard to beat for $950

70d deal isn't really so special. I think the week it was released I paid $899 which means $100 for each of those lenses and a free shitty bag. I'd just buy the body...

Have you tried just playing single frequencies to see the same effect? It should help you "localize" the problem. Quotes are because it won't be so local...

I was just going to rebuild it, 99% sure it is the diaphragm pump...but when the rebuild parts cost more than a full carb it seemed sort of pointless.

That is what I figured. It is a Walbro which I would assume is made in China at exactly the same plant.

Diaphragm took a dump on my Shindaiwa EB802 Leaf Blower. Diaphragm is $7+shipping. Not sure if I need something else besides gaskets. Thanks to China, complete carbs (all made in China) are from $8.50 to $40. Difference being that someone local bought 100 of them from China and are now selling in CA or whever. (new SD $60) http://www.ebay.com/itm/Carburetor-for-Shindaiwa-EB802-EB802RT-Carb-A021003240-/381289050323 My guess is also that is probably the factory carb...and if not probably doesn't matter. I am not nutso to just buy the <$9 carb, no?

That's right, a known source. Guess how you learn? It isn't by guessing, lol.

Trivia question for you. What do you think you need to measure your cabin response?

Sure the roof is killing them? It should at lower levels too then which you can counteract with your body. Like anything that flexes it needs a heat converter and a stiffener if it is real bad.

So guessing is better, lol? The software tells you everything about the response of the driver which you MUST take into account. Without that you are blind and stupid.

Because i didnt carry the 1

There is no 80d yet, so the 70d is not priced logically for a used purchase. Great camera though and worth it new WHEN it was new. I've had mine for nearly 2 years and paid less than what they go for new now and not much different from the used price. Camera gear that is 1 yr old doesn't depreciate (unless it is a kit piece). Need to source some a few years back. $453 is a bit steep only because you are paying for a new 1.4 and a used 40d. Hard to find used 1.4 though as most have a really hard time upgrading to the 1.2

I know you don't want to pay $2000 for a 70-200, but fuck it just don't get something that shoots long. You'll find that the Nikkor you are looking at can't focus on subjects that are moving a long ways away anyways rendering it functionally useless. It'll also stink at portraits since the F/4 isn't enough for bokeh worth a damn which was one of your first targets. Add to that the 18-55 just won't work inside without a flash (and a flash adds $200+) you'll really not like using it at all. You will NOT have those problems on a mirrorless....or with real glass.