t.

For those of you under the age of 10 or enrolled in private education, please be aware this video contains some naughty words. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OaJVHfO94A Lulwut?

and he walked.

Mark has so far as I can tell quite high expectations from his glass, and what he says should be considered although it may not be quite as crucial to someone in your situation. I currently use a 24-120 f4 which is a fairly expensive purchase for someone like me but it's delivering what I want, I wouldn't dream however of recommending spending that much to someone who is just starting out with a DSLR. In the conditions you will be using the camera though it really isn't going to be noticeable. Carrying around fixed or short focal lenses is great if you have huge amounts of time, money and space but for most of us a decent zoom does the job. If I had to buy either of those today, I'd take the 17-85. I can take shots from my 24-120 and crop them down, and the end result is better than the whole framed zoomed further on my cheaper 18-200. That makes sense in my head.. not so sure it does on screen but hey, whatever.

RRR, I guess you saw the chrome blue Ghost that's with it too?

What you say is a fair point. I'm able to see how unsharp my 18-200 was at that size though, worryingly lol.

Check out this guy's Flickr. He's a friend of mine and he uses a 60D and the 17-85 Canon Lens. His results are generally pretty nice with it. Based on what I see there I'd say it's a good investment. Of course user skill impacts results greatly.

I think broadening our horizons is the safest option in it all, perhaps starting with racing games and open world games like GTA etc and building up. (I know we kind of already do this but perhaps put more emphasis on it.) To become overnight a general gaming site would be of no benefit in my eyes as there are already thousands of those out there, many of which have much slacker rules on things such as language which appeals to people. That market is too crowded. I want to see this place survive basically, and if everyone else chooses a route I don't necessarily agree with I'll still support it in the interests of our little hole on the web. It's nice to see that so many people agree that this place has a special atmosphere, and honestly when I created this thread I didn't expect it to pick up like this, if anything I did it as a bit of a joke and a stab at the woeful sequel. This place may be quiet, but as we proved the other night with various antics it can still be as random and funny as ever. Hopefully this transition, should we make one, will keep the active user number up enough to make the hijinks a day to day occurrence again. As for names, it's past my creativity curfew.

On top of that my old 55-200 produced nicer images than my 18-200, though neither was bad.

NOM

Yes. Next.

Ah ha, I'm so white. :3

The sarcasm is strong with this one.

There were only on strike for one day, although I admit you could be forgiven for thinking it was much longer.

I can't help on the Tamron front but I have a Sigma 70-300 (the cheap one without stabalisation) and it's okay so long as the weather is bright. The 70-300's are fairly big for hand holding and without the stabalisation I find that getting a nice sharp image pretty tough unless the weather is glorious. Otherwise you'll be ramping the ISO up to get the desired shutter and that in turn makes the image less clean. So with this focal range I would put IS, VR or whatever you call it as a must, in my opinion of course. So how does the Sigma compare to first party lenses? Well in my experience it's not bad. The colours and contrast certainly lack the punch I get from my Nikkor Lenses and if you go all the way to 100% you can see differences but again, the casual eye probably wouldn't. So which would I get.... I would personally take the better quality glass and sacrifice some zoom but it all depends on what you need. I imagine 300mm at a track for example would make a noticeable difference but as I've not really been to one I wouldn't know, Kelv should though... wherever he is.

[media=vimeo]23747191[/media]

If this is TDU2 it sounds very similar to what happened to me. My TDU2 save didn't actually corrupt, it just vanished. Everything else was left, photos, license data etc but the player save was gone. If it is that then there is no way back. Do you have your your actual save file? Or just the other random ones?

A hot chic better drive that.

Well it'll be hard pushed to get any worse so why not.

Nice shots, I remember this game. Used to play it once, right load of arse.

DLC can be made many months in advance of it's release then just sat on until they want to put it out. Didn't the TDU1 demo features cars that later arrived as DLC? The box certainly did.

The arrival of the Virage makes the DB9 basically dead in the water in my eyes. It has the same prettiness but with a fresher face, better sat nav etc. The DBS is just pure awesome. The Vantages then fit in below, although the V12 V is hardly below.. it's just an alternate form of awesome that isn't quite so pretty. The Cygnet is.. to offset some of the V12 carbon? I dunno. It's ghastly though.

[media=vimeo]17694157[/media]

So can we carry on with our 10 digit bank accounts intact? ;D

Google works off more than just site names an URL's though, think of all the online stores who's names are irrelevant to what they actually supply. So it could be done and retain a prominent place.