Occupation: Moving to Dominican Republic, very soon!<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13783823#post13783823 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by maxalmon
DR?
Yep, Alaska is a pretty cool place.<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13784215#post13784215 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by maxalmon
Recty, see that your in AK...I spent 5 years up their, loved it!! x-airforce, got out and worked for the Native American Hospital and had to fly out every 2 weeks to a remote village to do exams. Totally insane places I've been, Dutch Harbour, Akitan, Shishmarif, White Horse, Dead Horse etc.... I've been to almost every remote village in AK, flown in on a cesna with ski's...
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13787364#post13787364 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by maxalmon
I am totally happy with both sigma lens, I went with then for several reasons, mostly based on feedback from other photographers and posted technical reports.
24-70mm EX is finally starting to loosen up as the zoom is somewhat stiff, this has been a common issue but I kinda like the stiffness. You simply can't go wrong with this lens. The only thing that kinda ticked me off was that it uses 82mm filters which cost a fortune.
I got the Nikon 105 VR lens when I got my original D40, I was just starting to get serious about photography and honestly the 105mm was the macro lens listed on the Nikon site and I really didn't know any better. It's a fantastic lens, love the optics and have no complaints. I haven't really done any research or comparison with other lens.
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13788304#post13788304 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by klepto
Im using sigma's fixed focal 105mm. I love the lens in general. Nikon's optics still have a slight edge though imo. I was just too cheap to fork the extra cash.
Cool photos by the way! thanks for postin