Calling All NAS Enablers, Need Help - Update: Decision Made [Archive] - The DIS Discussion Forums

annnewjerz

08-10-2009, 10:26 AM

I'm in trouble. I have managed to really keep my NAS under control these past five months as a result of saving for our upcoming trip(s) to WDW. But I'm getting the itch again and I don't know if I'll be able to deal with it much longer. :headache:

Here's my situation (it's a little wordy, but what's new?).

I was thinking about renting the 10.5 fisheye for our October trip and the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 & Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 for our trip in December since these are all lenses I have an interest in maybe purchasing down the road. Total, it would be almost $300 to rent these for the 10-day period including shipping and insurance.

Right now on KEH, I can get a Nikon 105 f/2.8 AIS (bargain rating I believe, which I'm fine with) for $200. I have always loved the "look" of the shots Jeff has posted with his, they have a sort of dream-like quality to them. My only hesitation is the lack of metering with my D90. Side note: Would this be a huge deal in normal ourdoor well-lit conditions?? I would just get a meter reading with another lens and then swap them out and manually set the aperture and shutter speed, and oh yeah---shoot in RAW so I could fix my mistakes later. ;)

The more I use the primes I do have (the Sigma 30, the Nikon 50 and the Nikon 60) the more I like them and find myself using the 18-200 less, so I figured the 105 would be a nice addition, right?? :rolleyes1

So---would you a) rent the 3 lenses for $300 or b)buy the 105 and rent a wide angle for December only?

Suburbanmom

08-10-2009, 10:41 AM

LOL - You have quite a problem, don't you! LOL
I'd buy the 105 and rent the wide angle. A lens you can keep is always better than 2 you have to return.

dmccarty

08-10-2009, 10:50 AM

I would recommend the 105mm/F 2.8 D lens but not sure I would say the same with AIS. I have the 105mm/F2.8D lens and it gets used frequently. It is used for taking photos of my kids soccer games. A 80-200 zoom would be better and I might buy one but the 105 fits the size of the fields where the kids are playing soccer. A 180mm is a tad long most of the time.

Having a micro lens, a tripod, remote release and a good ball head really opens up a lot of photography around the house. I have a paper box full of Kodachromes of flowers. One day I will get them scanned, printed and framed. :)

You might want to wait for a 105 D lens to show up on the market. I really don't understand a macro lens with VR. VR does not stop the movement of the flower in the wind. :rotfl: If VR COULD stop the movement then it would be worth the money!:banana::banana: I have spent more time than I care to think about setting up a photo and then waiting for the wind to stop.... :laughing:

VR could help of course if the lens is not use for close ups.

Later,
Dan

spinetnglr

08-10-2009, 01:00 PM

PM sent ;) .. I am an enabler of the worst kind :lmao:

Gdad

08-10-2009, 05:43 PM

Oh sure- blame me for your NAS...:rolleyes1 ;)

You know I love my 105 AI-S- it's far and away my personal favorite macro between the 105 AF-D, the 105 AF-S VR, and the Sigma 150, all of which I have owned and sold- but I think the metering thing would be a pain honestly. If I got it I would definitely not be swapping lenses to meter- I would just guesstimate the exposure and adjust by the histogram. But I never had one when I used an incompatible camera so I don't know for sure.

Gdad

08-10-2009, 06:12 PM

Chikabowa

08-10-2009, 06:49 PM

I personally haven't necessarily been enthralled with he 105mm when I've rented it. I found it searching for focus more often than being reliable. Plus the lack of a meter would drive me insane, even though like Jeff, I can guesstimate pretty well.

But with that said... I've wasted more money renting lenses long-term (7-10 days) and I pretty much refuse to do it anymore. It made me sick when I realized that I could have purchased my 70-200mm lens with the money that I had spent renting it for various reasons. :)

So my suggestion would be to set up an account at a local pro-shop that rents lenses (if you have one, otherwise, do it online) and rent each one of those lenses for a couple of days. I know my local shop, if you pick it up after 3pm on Friday and return by 10am on Monday, you are only charged a one-day rental (which usually ranges between $10-35).

I would purchase the lens you know you want (the 105mm) and then rent the others and figure out if you want to buy them from that. I know you probably want them for Disney... but could you buy one of them for $300?? If so, buy it, if you hate it, it won't loose much value and you can sell it!

YesDear

08-10-2009, 06:55 PM

Quicklabs

08-10-2009, 07:10 PM

I hate to participate in your NAS, but since you asked and I COULDN"T refuse, and you knew I would have to weigh in (payback for your enabling ways!!! LOL)
As for the fish--I'm thinking there's a steep learning curve on that one. And while Disney has some great potential fish shots, it might be more frustrating than fun on your vacation. Rent the fish some other time when you can devote 100% attention to just that one. You don't want to be futzing with all those lenses, anyway.

The 80-200. Hmmmmm-tricky call here, because I was thinking about renting the 70-200mm myself for my trip. But that's a lot of lens to lug around Disney. On the fence about this one. I'm leaning toward "no".

Now, for the Tokina. THAT has some possiblilities. Not a lot to lug around. And you could have lots of fun with crazy angles as well as being able to get close and take some really cool shots. I didn't use my 10-20 nearly enough last time. That's what I'm going to be concentrating on this trip.
So, I'm leaning toward the Tokina.

But, you called for enabling, and I haven't really enabled. Yet. So...

Don't buy the 105mm. That's $200 in your pocket. Now, if you rent the Tokina, it's what, about $60 for 10 days? OK, with the $200 SAVED on the 105 and $60 bucks for rental, you're almost halfway home on owning the sucker. BUY the Tokina. If you don't like it, you can sell it: everybody is trying to get their hands on one. You'll probably still be out no less than $100 on that. So, you're MAKING money either way. Genius, huh?

Take your 30, your 18-200 and the Tokina to Disney. What the heck, throw in the 50 as well--you can carry that baby in your pocket. You'll be travelling pretty light and have everything you need! :thumbsup2

annnewjerz

08-10-2009, 07:24 PM

Okay- out of curiosity I threw it on the D40 went outside and took a wild guess at the settings- late afternoon shade- ISO400-f8-1/125 was a little dark- 1/100 looked pretty good exposure wise. I guess metering is not all that tough. ;)

http://scl.smugmug.com/photos/616263551_pY4Ww-O.jpg

:rotfl2: I wouldn't consider it blaming you per se, more attributing my lens lust to your wonderful shots. That sounds much better, right?? ;)

Thank you so much for doing this. It's nice to see it isn't such a huge deal. I wouldn't swap out the lenses to get a meter read all the time---I just meant if I wasn't yet comfortable guessing for the first few times, I could start out with another lens, make a mental note of the settings and then swap out for an afternoon of using the 105.

Hrmmmmmmmm.....:idea:

annnewjerz

08-10-2009, 07:32 PM

I personally haven't necessarily been enthralled with he 105mm when I've rented it. I found it searching for focus more often than being reliable. Plus the lack of a meter would drive me insane, even though like Jeff, I can guesstimate pretty well.

Thanks for the feedback Susan. :thumbsup2 Luckily, I expected this to be your response because I remember you singing the praises of the Nikon 60mm---which led to me purchase it around 6 months ago. :) The 105 I more as a mid-length fast telephoto lens than a macro. AND--the hunting for focus wouldn't be a problem, because it's a manual focus lens rather than auto focus.

But with that said... I've wasted more money renting lenses long-term (7-10 days) and I pretty much refuse to do it anymore. It made me sick when I realized that I could have purchased my 70-200mm lens with the money that I had spent renting it for various reasons. :)

:eek: I wouldn't rent anymore if I had spent enough total to buy the 70-200 either!

I would purchase the lens you know you want (the 105mm) and then rent the others and figure out if you want to buy them from that. I know you probably want them for Disney... but could you buy one of them for $300?? If so, buy it, if you hate it, it won't loose much value and you can sell it!

This was sort of my thinking. I actually don't want the 105 for Disney, just want it in general. :goodvibes It's just that I can only buy one of them between now and the end of the year---so with the 105 being the cheapest, it just seemed to make the most sense. For something as taste-specific as a wide angle or fisheye, I'd definitely rent for a few days first. Hopefully I can find out if there is a pro shop nearby. Never looked---but I live 45 minutes from Philadelphia so I'm sure there must be one somewhere around here. The local camera shop rents out lenses, but they don't offer any type of insurance and I just didn't get a good feeling about renting from them.

annnewjerz

08-10-2009, 07:37 PM

Jeff at least it is better you get blamed. It is usually me!

My personal belief is I would probably not get the 105. Great lens, but for all the other things you need I mean want, I would quell that desire and save for a 10.5.

But that is me.

You do not want to know how I have been feeding my photo needs recently. At least the economy is happier!

Nope, not you this time. ;)

I have an offer right now to borrow someone's 10.5 (cough cough KARYL ;)) but am not sure if I'll do it yet. If I do, I'm sure I'll want it.

But you see John, this is merely what lens should I purchase right now. With Christmas coming within the next few months, I'm sure there will be no shortage of camera-related purchases with my holiday money :santa: I can always get the 10.5 then!

I hate to participate in your NAS, but since you asked and I COULDN"T refuse, and you knew I would have to weigh in (payback for your enabling ways!!! LOL)
As for the fish--I'm thinking there's a steep learning curve on that one. And while Disney has some great potential fish shots, it might be more frustrating than fun on your vacation. Rent the fish some other time when you can devote 100% attention to just that one. You don't want to be futzing with all those lenses, anyway.

The 80-200. Hmmmmm-tricky call here, because I was thinking about renting the 70-200mm myself for my trip. But that's a lot of lens to lug around Disney. On the fence about this one. I'm leaning toward "no".

Now, for the Tokina. THAT has some possiblilities. Not a lot to lug around. And you could have lots of fun with crazy angles as well as being able to get close and take some really cool shots. I didn't use my 10-20 nearly enough last time. That's what I'm going to be concentrating on this trip.
So, I'm leaning toward the Tokina.

But, you called for enabling, and I haven't really enabled. Yet. So...

Don't buy the 105mm. That's $200 in your pocket. Now, if you rent the Tokina, it's what, about $60 for 10 days? OK, with the $200 SAVED on the 105 and $60 bucks for rental, you're almost halfway home on owning the sucker. BUY the Tokina. If you don't like it, you can sell it: everybody is trying to get their hands on one. You'll probably still be out no less than $100 on that. So, you're MAKING money either way. Genius, huh?

Take your 30, your 18-200 and the Tokina to Disney. What the heck, throw in the 50 as well--you can carry that baby in your pocket. You'll be travelling pretty light and have everything you need! :thumbsup2

So I was confused by how you were "enabling" exactly because you kept telling me not to rent or buy ANYTHING!! Then I got to the end. Well put, Laura. So many decisions!! Unfortunately---the Tokina is going right now for like $650, so half-way there is a bit of a stretch, don't ya think ;)

AND---this doesn't help me with my desire to buy something right now. You see? While very sound advice, very problematic because it means I still have MONTHS AND MONTHS to keep my NAS under control. I don't know if I can. :guilty:

YesDear

08-10-2009, 08:55 PM

WDWFigment

08-10-2009, 08:57 PM

Unfortunately---the Tokina is going right now for like $650, so half-way there is a bit of a stretch, don't ya think ;)

I agree with QuickLabs completely. The Tokina and fisheye are too cheap of lenses to rent. I see the Tokina (Nikon mount) for as low as $625 shipped on eBay right now. I get daily email updates on it (despite having purchased it months ago, I suppose I should change those email settings...) from eBay and I regularly see it for $525-575 shipped.

Plus, Bing.com cashback for eBay is 10% right now. Even for the $625 price, you're looking at it costing around $562.50. Even after paypal and ebay fees, you would be ahead if you did decide to resell it after buying.

annnewjerz

08-10-2009, 09:10 PM

There is something really great about NAS, this group and you!

NAS is never going away

This group is like all other groups, we have a good variety of approaches.

From what I know about you, you are going to get what you want. (That is not a bad thing) and you can use which ever opinion you need to satisfy your NAS!!!

Oh John, you always know how to bring me right back down to Earth. I never think I'm really that bad until you chime in and put me in my place!! :guilty: :headache:

I know---I shouldn't, but whenever I get money for doing something photography related (took some pics this weekend for our neighbor)---I feel like it's only right of me to rush out and spend it. Having $250 in my pocket just waiting for a rainy day doesn't sound like much fun to me!!

And you're right. You know me well enough to know that I'm going to get what I want, because out of 10 opinions telling me to wait---there will always be Laura, Jeff and Johns in the world to tell me to spend. :thumbsup2

You're starting to sound like my DH. :rolleyes1 :lmao:

ColleenG

08-10-2009, 09:41 PM

WARNING!! Dumb newbie question coming. I get what NAS is, but what does it stand for? For the life of me I can't figure it out.

Code

08-10-2009, 09:43 PM

The 105 I more as a mid-length fast telephoto lens than a macro. AND--the hunting for focus wouldn't be a problem, because it's a manual focus lens rather than auto focus.

I thought you wanted the 105mm for macro until I read that you already have the 60mm. My take is that manual exposure on macro stuff might not be so bad as you have time to be more deliberate and you're manually focusing anyway, but used as a medium tele, that just sounds like an exercise in frustration.

TinksDH

08-10-2009, 10:14 PM

ColleenG:

Nikon Acquisition Syndrome

Gdad

08-10-2009, 10:22 PM

If you already have the 60mm for macro I would have to agree with Code and say skip the 105mm. The smooth manual focus is the ticket for macro stuff but not all that great for everything else unless you are just in to that kind of stuff. And as for the AF macro's in the 105-150 range I mentioned they all focus hunt like crazy and are even more frustrating to use as a medium tele.

Chikabowa

08-10-2009, 10:42 PM

I triple agree... if you don't get the 105 for macro, I'd totally skip it. If you want a fast prime lens that has beautiful bokeh and is just freaking awesome, buy the 135mm f2. That lens is awesome... however it's old. And I've heard rumors that Nikon is releasing a newer version of the lens (BTW - If I could get myself to ever put down the 70-200, the 135 would be a close second. :) ).

The problem with the super wide angles and the fish eye is that they are kind of speciality lenses. If you are doing portraits of people, there is just too much distortion to make them great portraits, it just makes people and body parts look weird. If you are specializing in landscape and architecture, then I could see wanting the super wide angle and that totally makes sense. I know you shoot with a cropped sensor, but even so, a 10mm lens, is still 15mm on your cropped sensor, which is still pretty super wide angle. I hate shooting with the 20mm prime on my full frame because it's just distorts everything too much.

But the fish eye... as cool as it is... can be sooooooooo overdone. You don't want to come home from Disney with 1000 fish eye pics, you'll get bored really quickly. :) I felt that way when I bought the Lens Baby Composer... it's awesome. For like 1 or 2 shots. Then it just looks over-done and boring. And I find myself hardly ever using it. Which was kind of a waste of $300.

So with that... I would weigh your choices. It sounds like the Tonkina might just be the perfect solution with renting the fish eye from time to time when you want something a little different to play around with.

WDWFigment

08-11-2009, 08:43 AM

Here is a Tokina 11-16 that would be $549.50 after bing.com cashback. Not too bad, and you could definitely resell for more.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110423229894&ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:US:1123

fitzperry

08-11-2009, 10:02 AM

Not to confuse matters further, but have you considered the Tokina 12-24? It's f/4 instead of 2.8, but a more versatile range (IMO) than the 11-16 and cheaper to boot. $399 at B & H right now (unless you need the newer version with the focus motor in the lens--I can't remember which camera body you have), and I think you could use that bing cashback thingie to save a few more $$. Haven't used mine at Disney yet, but I would think it would be a fun lens to have there.

Also, you mentioned the 80-200 2.8--I almost had one for $350 on Craigslist last weekend. I traded voicemails with the seller trying to arrange a time to meet, and evidently someone else just jumped in and said they'd take it. :sad::sad::sad:

annnewjerz

08-11-2009, 10:29 AM

I thought you wanted the 105mm for macro until I read that you already have the 60mm. My take is that manual exposure on macro stuff might not be so bad as you have time to be more deliberate and you're manually focusing anyway, but used as a medium tele, that just sounds like an exercise in frustration.

If you already have the 60mm for macro I would have to agree with Code and say skip the 105mm. The smooth manual focus is the ticket for macro stuff but not all that great for everything else unless you are just in to that kind of stuff. And as for the AF macro's in the 105-150 range I mentioned they all focus hunt like crazy and are even more frustrating to use as a medium tele.

I triple agree... if you don't get the 105 for macro, I'd totally skip it. If you want a fast prime lens that has beautiful bokeh and is just freaking awesome, buy the 135mm f2. That lens is awesome... however it's old. And I've heard rumors that Nikon is releasing a newer version of the lens (BTW - If I could get myself to ever put down the 70-200, the 135 would be a close second. :) ).

D'oh! :headache: Triple agreements that I shouldn't get it.

Susan, the 135 f/2 looks :thumbsup2. I saw some used on KEH (I don't think I would buy one new for over $1,000) and it's something to consider---just not something to consider right now, since at this moment $700 is going towards my mortgage payment rather than a new lens. Unfortunate, I know. :sad2: :rotfl:

Here is a Tokina 11-16 that would be $549.50 after bing.com cashback. Not too bad, and you could definitely resell for more.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110423229894&ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:US:1123

Ooooooh. Thank you for the link. :hyper: I didn't even know what bing.com cashback was---but that's the best price I've seen recently. I was on Amazon the other day and it was $650 and up.

Not to confuse matters further, but have you considered the Tokina 12-24? It's f/4 instead of 2.8, but a more versatile range (IMO) than the 11-16 and cheaper to boot. $399 at B & H right now (unless you need the newer version with the focus motor in the lens--I can't remember which camera body you have), and I think you could use that bing cashback thingie to save a few more $$. Haven't used mine at Disney yet, but I would think it would be a fun lens to have there.

Also, you mentioned the 80-200 2.8--I almost had one for $350 on Craigslist last weekend. I traded voicemails with the seller trying to arrange a time to meet, and evidently someone else just jumped in and said they'd take it. :sad::sad::sad:

Here is my thought on the Tokina 12-24. It looks very nice, I like the price much more and I agree---it is covers a range of focal lengths that I would probably find more useful. That being said---the f/4 is my problem. For now, f/4 would be more than fine, but we are thinking about taking a trip to Europe in the next year or two and I'm thinking the f/2.8 might be better for indoor shooting in places like churches, museums, etc. The D90 can handle pretty high ISOs, but having never been to Europe before I'm not sure exactly how dim "dim" really is. I would hate to buy the 12-24 and then need to rent the 11-16 for our trip to avoid using ISO 3200 & 6400.

As for the 80-200 f/2.8----$350?! I don't even think I've seen the older push/pull models for that cheap used. That would have been a great deal if the lens was in nice condition and you were able to get it for such little money. I've been looking at Craig's List a lot recently and for living around a few big cities, there sure isn't much in the way of used gear floating around.

fitzperry

08-11-2009, 11:14 AM

Here is my thought on the Tokina 12-24. It looks very nice, I like the price much more and I agree---it is covers a range of focal lengths that I would probably find more useful. That being said---the f/4 is my problem. For now, f/4 would be more than fine, but we are thinking about taking a trip to Europe in the next year or two and I'm thinking the f/2.8 might be better for indoor shooting in places like churches, museums, etc. The D90 can handle pretty high ISOs, but having never been to Europe before I'm not sure exactly how dim "dim" really is. I would hate to buy the 12-24 and then need to rent the 11-16 for our trip to avoid using ISO 3200 & 6400.

As for the 80-200 f/2.8----$350?! I don't even think I've seen the older push/pull models for that cheap used. That would have been a great deal if the lens was in nice condition and you were able to get it for such little money. I've been looking at Craig's List a lot recently and for living around a few big cities, there sure isn't much in the way of used gear floating around.

It was the AF-D version. I discovered in my research that the guy had tried to sell it on eBay w/ an opening bid of $400 but got no bids. He had only 1 feedback, so that is likely why, but it still surprised me. Looked nice in the pictures; he had the box, but no lens hood; said it was in perfect optical condition and that he was the original owner. I was hesitant because I'm concerned about getting burned on a used lens purchase and because I honestly feel kind of guilty about paying far less than something is worth. If it was in the condition he represented he should have been able to get at least $700 for that lens. But it looks like my hesitation cost me a great bargain on a lens I'd love to have. :headache:

Wrt the Tokina, I just took a look at a few of the darker shots I took with my D70 and 18-70mm kit lens at Notre Dame when we were in Paris a couple of years ago. In aperture priority mode I was using ISO's of 800 and 1600 with f/4.5 and f/5.6, and I was getting shutter speeds varying between 1/25 and 1/50. I did pretty well in the museums with that kit as well, though obviously it would have been nice to have the option of a wider aperture. Personally, I wouldn't feel the need to rent a faster wide angle than the f/4 if we were going back there (and I really want to do that!), especially with a couple of fast primes in my arsenal as backup. Tough decisions!

Chikabowa

08-11-2009, 11:28 AM

ColleenG

08-11-2009, 08:44 PM

ColleenG:

Nikon Acquisition Syndrome

Aaahhh! I didn't realize it was brand specific. I have a Canon so I guess I have CAS.

annnewjerz

08-11-2009, 08:54 PM

So everyone will be shocked by this statement---but I have decided to exhibit some self control and will not be purchasing anything at this time.

Hard to believe, right? Well that's because I'm full of it. :rotfl2: Here is the real story of why I will not be making any purchases (a little OT, but it all comes full circle by the end).

We have two dogs, Mickey (a Golden Retriever) and Rocky (a Chocolate Lab). Both dogs are 2 years old. Mickey has two bad back hips already and will need replacements eventually. Here they are:

http://annnewjerz.smugmug.com/photos/501411498_Xm8Vj-M.jpg

http://annnewjerz.smugmug.com/photos/501411459_EUc7c-M.jpg

Recently, Rocky has developed a limp. He was acting grumpy, sleeping a lot, had gained some weight and just generally seemed unhappy. We took him for some x-rays last week hoping for the best and found out that he also has a bad back hip and arthritis in his knee. We started him on supplements and pain pills.

...............Well, I guess those things work wonders because our usually off the wall, goofy dog is back to normal. Yesterday he chewed not one, but two pairs of my flip flops and we knew he was back to his "good" old self. After complaining I told DH "I would rather have ruined flip flops and a happy dog than have Rocky be unhappy." :hug: Little did I know, today that would already come back to bite me in the butt. :eek:

I got an e-mail from DH while I was on my 12th hour at work and in the middle of getting a huge filing out the door to the Court and this is what I saw: :scared1: :scared1: :scared1:

http://annnewjerz.smugmug.com/photos/617483705_gmHKQ-M.jpg

Well, Rocky managed to break out of his lock-up while we are at work and ruined not his first, but his second set of couches in his short two years of life. The last pair were down to boards and foam before we replaced them. This is the same dog that around Christmas last year, decided to use the brand new domes that came with my brand new Gary Fong diffusers as a frisbee/chew toy. Luckily (if you can call it that) he just tore apart a few of the cushions that you use for behind your back.

So, to make a long story longer---the money I was itching to put towards a new lens will now be put towards throw pillows/slip covers and a new ottoman for our living room.

Oh the joys of having pets. :headache:

For the record, the Golden Retriever is my dog and the Chocolate Lab is my DH's. It goes without saying that my excuse for being able to spend money on photography stuff each year is the fact that his fun money goes out the window every time his dog gets his mouth on something. :rolleyes1

spinetnglr

08-11-2009, 10:31 PM

All I can say to that story and pic is

:scared1::scared1::scared1::scared1::scared1:

annnewjerz

08-12-2009, 09:17 AM

All I can say to that story and pic is

:scared1::scared1::scared1::scared1::scared1:

....................my thoughts exactly. :rolleyes:

Gdad

08-12-2009, 09:47 AM

See what your hesitation got you? Stop asking questions- embrace impulsive NAS! ;)

Suburbanmom

08-12-2009, 10:43 AM

Chikabowa

08-12-2009, 11:10 AM

Oh my... Jeff just totally cracked me up.

I'm sorry... I'm not much of an animal lover (don't mind if other people have them, just don't want them myself), but that would have made me sooooooooooooooo mad. Oh, I would have been steaming.

Sorry you have to not get the lenses and put the money towards furniture.

annnewjerz

08-12-2009, 11:27 AM

See what your hesitation got you? Stop asking questions- embrace impulsive NAS! ;)

He's right...if you had acted faster, you have the lens AND a mess to clean up. The moral of the story is to buy the lens quickly.

:rotfl2: :rotfl2:

Good point---next time, I'll make sure I do that. After Christmas when I'm supposed to be saving for a down payment for a new car, I'll just rush right into lots of lenses. I'll take the Tokina 11-16, the Nikon 10.5 Fisheye, the Nikon 70-200 and the 85mm f/1.4. Who needs a car when there are so many other wonderful things to spend your money on? :thumbsup2

Oh my... Jeff just totally cracked me up.

I'm sorry... I'm not much of an animal lover (don't mind if other people have them, just don't want them myself), but that would have made me sooooooooooooooo mad. Oh, I would have been steaming.

Sorry you have to not get the lenses and put the money towards furniture.

Oh I was feeling LOTS of things. :mad: Mad was definitely one of them---unfortunately shocked was not one of them. :rolleyes:

We have waste far too much money fixing up things the dogs have ruined (couches, chewed walls, chewed shoes, etc.) and we're finally getting the idea that maybe a baby gate isn't the best thing to keep 2 100lb+ dogs locked up. :headache: Live and learn right? It will not be happening again.

I'm not too concerned about the lens. It'll always be there and I kept myself from yet another impulse purchase. I'm sure I would have loved the lens (haven't found one yet that I haven't enjoyed)---but it's probably for the best that I didn't buy it juuuuust yet.

Sewfun

08-12-2009, 01:07 PM

ColleenG:

Nikon Acquisition Syndrome

So if I have a Sony it would be SAS?

spinetnglr

08-12-2009, 01:12 PM

I think we should maybe generalize this affliction and just call it PEAS - Photography Equipment Acquisition Syndrome. :rotfl:

Todd_H

08-12-2009, 03:55 PM

http://annnewjerz.smugmug.com/photos/617483705_gmHKQ-M.jpg

:eek:

Wow. First, I am very sorry to hear about Mickey and Rocky's hip problems. Those will not be fun issues to deal with down the road. Second, I am very sorry about your couch cushions (may they rest in peace... or pieces... not sure). I can relate to this as our 7 month old Husky is a goat in disguise. She literally eats EVERYTHING. We can't leave her unsupervised in our back yard for fear that she'll eat a bunch of landscaping rocks (I kid you not). She has also eaten shoes, socks, kid's toys (fortunately none of my "toys" yet :rolleyes1), carpet, our lab (tries to chew her face occasionally), a remote control, some outdoor furniture, and the plastic dryer vent cap right off of the house (seriously). Oh, and she gets me up at 5:45 every morning to be let out. If she wasn't so cute, I'd probably still put up with it :).

Quicklabs

08-12-2009, 04:27 PM

Todd_H

08-12-2009, 04:34 PM

Very, very, VERY naughty Lab. Time to institute some Labby tough-love. I'm a strong believer in NILIF for bad labbies.

http://k9deb.com/nilif.htm

That being said, you need to console yourself with a new lens.

That's funny... my wife and I are reading a book called "Have a New Kid By Friday" that preaches those exact same tactics for children. Great stuff :thumbsup2

annnewjerz

08-12-2009, 07:17 PM

Very, very, VERY naughty Lab. Time to institute some Labby tough-love. I'm a strong believer in NILIF for bad labbies. I'm not shocked by that mess. Since I have Labs, too, and lots of friends with Labs I've seen it all. I need to find the picture where Augusta climbed up the bookcase and made about 50-60 hardcover (some irreplaceable) books into confetti. It's a Lab thing. NILIF worked for Augusta, as well as giving her opportunities to put her mouth on things legally. This is why she helps me do the laundry and has so many jobs around here. Really did help to solve the problem of confetti books, sunglasses removed from purse in a closed closet (handles--she can open them), I don't know how many pairs of flip flops, a $300 gold necklace disassembled link by link (most of it on the floor, the rest in 24 Karat poop!)

That being said, you need to console yourself with a new lens. I really think it will help you feel better about your relationship with Rocky! Glad to help, as always.
NILIF:
http://k9deb.com/nilif

That's a very very very good little article to read. I have read similar things before (about ignoring a dog that wants attention, etc.) and just never thought it would work. The hardest part of all of this is that the dogs really don't know much in the way of basic obedience. They can sit, they can (sometimes) stay, they can jump on the couch if we want them to sit with us (bad humans, I know! :headache:) but I don't know if that's enough.

It has really gotten to the point where it's CRAZY. We don't even sleep in the same room at night because all the chocolate lab does is bark (we don't let them upstairs because of the Golden Retriever's hip problems---we're worried on the way down in the middle of the night he might hurt himself). One night, we decided to put our foot down. We laid in bed for 5 hours listnening to non-stop barking before my DH finally gave in and came downstairs because he wanted to sleep before work. I told him not to, but he wouldn't listen. So, things haven't gotten any better. We thought maybe they'd grow out of it, but it's been two years now. We thought maybe if we started taking them out to play fetch and walking them more it might make them a little less anxious and crazy while they were locked up for the 10 hours we are at work each day, but that doesn't seem to be working either.

If I wasn't such an animal lover, I'm at the point where I'd get rid of them in a second, but I just can't. It's a bad situation.

Todd_H

08-12-2009, 08:17 PM

It has really gotten to the point where it's CRAZY. We don't even sleep in the same room at night because all the chocolate lab does is bark. One night, we decided to put our foot down. We laid in bed for 5 hours listnening to non-stop barking before my DH finally gave in and came downstairs because he wanted to sleep before work. I told him not to, but he wouldn't listen. So, things haven't gotten any better. We thought maybe they'd grow out of it, but it's been two years now. We thought maybe if we started taking them out to play fetch and walking them more it might make them a little less anxious and crazy while they were locked up for the 10 hours we are at work each day, but that doesn't seem to be working either.

If I wasn't such an animal lover, I'm at the point where I'd get rid of them in a second, but I just can't. It's a bad situation.

It sounds like your chocolate lab is going through some bad separation anxiety. Here's a pretty decent article that offers some tips on dealing with it: http://www.2ndchance.info/sepanxiety.htm

annnewjerz

08-12-2009, 08:33 PM

It sounds like your chocolate lab is going through some bad separation anxiety. Here's a pretty decent article that offers some tips on dealing with it: http://www.2ndchance.info/sepanxiety.htm

Obviously this is getting way OT, but I can see that being a cause. Our Rocky is a special dog in many ways. We swear he was taken from his mother too soon (we got him at 6 weeks). Every day before he goes to sleep at night, he grabs one of his blankets and sucks on it like he is nursing. He is VERY fearful of stupid stuff (like walking through a space that's too small) and barks all the time. If I go upstairs just to get a 15 minute shower in the morning, I can usually guarantee that after about 5-10 of those minutes pass, there will be something getting ripped apart---magazines, shoes, couch cushions, cardboard. He doesn't do any of those things when we are downstairs with him. Occasionally he'll walk into the room we are in with a piece of junk mail in his mouth, but nothing like what happens when we aren't home to supervise.

I've talked to the vet about it before and they suggested some sort of pill that I wasn't interested in. I just don't want to start him on any medication that isn't completely necessary. The vet didn't really suggest any things that are non-medicinal to do at home, but unless I want a new couch every year, I think it's about time I considered doing something about it. Either lock the dogs in our bedroom while we sleep or buy a sleeper sofa for the living room. :thumbsup2