[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by gd1418

Oh Raj, who wouldn't want to have thse lenses. But I don't generally shoot landscapes & portraits so have never felt the need for the 24, 85, 35 etc.

My 80~200 f/2.8 does a swell of a job so don't need the 200 f/2. I tried selling my right kidney for the 300 f/2.8 but couldn't find a buyer. Had to settle for the 300 f/4 (didn't sell any organ)...

My wish list:

200~400 f/4

600 f/4

Trust me when I say this, Your missing a heap by not having 85mm, be it 1.8 or 1.4, then comes the 135mm f2 DC miracle, it changed the way I did car shots and wedding shots. Its THAT good. I still can`t believe I stayed without it for so long.

And once you try 300mm f2.8, you don`t go back BTW there is a very rare 300mm f2.0 too but I have never been able to find one.

[gd1418]

My lens buying spree are all need based. As mentioned earlier too am not a landscape/portrait guy. I love to roam the jungles and shoot. And I'm not a birdie too.

Wedding, shooting cars etc., a big no no for me.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Trust me when I say this, Your missing a heap by not having 85mm, be it 1.8 or 1.4, then comes the 135mm f2 DC miracle, it changed the way I did car shots and wedding shots. Its THAT good. I still can`t believe I stayed without it for so long.

Please find a buyer for my right kidney. Blood group O+

Originally Posted by rajb3125

And once you try 300mm f2.8, you don`t go back BTW there is a very rare 300mm f2.0 too but I have never been able to find one.

[rajb3125]

Note from Support: Please go through the rules before posting. Not more than 2 smilies are allowed per post. Also, please check this on how to upload pics.

[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by gd1418

My lens buying spree are all need based. As mentioned earlier too am not a landscape/portrait guy. I love to roam the jungles and shoot. And I'm not a birdie too.

Wedding, shooting cars etc., a big no no for me.


Please find a buyer for my right kidney. Blood group O+

Well my gear is based on Need + Tax Refunds, I would rather buy more gear then to give money to Tax-man, especially considering I don`t get any benefit out of it.

I understand if you only do jungle and nothing else, everyone has there own fantasy

But if you require reach then I would assume a DX body would be better suited to your needs, I understand you got Dx mode on D800 but still D7000 is much much cheaper than D800 ;-)

I don`t know anyone who needs a new kidney, although if you wanna handhold a 300mm f2.8, you would need to get 2 extra kidneys, rather than selling one of two you have

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by rajb3125

I already have 600mm f5.6 (300mm f2.8 and TC2x)

I miss the TC that would complete what I call the "poor man's 600mm"

Originally Posted by gd1418

I ordered them online from deltapage.com

Thanks mate

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Still havn't had the chance to open the boxes, bar my secret love 85mm f1.4G That's not complete setup by any stretch, basically a bout half of my kit Enjoy.

Can't see your kit mate..no pics visible.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

although if you wanna handhold a 300mm f2.8, you would need to get 2 extra kidneys, rather than selling one of two you have

I was LOL! when I read this...but seriously mate..the 300mm is not THAT heavy. A pain but not unbearable. Try handshooting with the 400mm F/2.8 or the 600mm F/4 - you would need a glucose drip, respirator + a spare pair of arms.

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by rajb3125

I am not saying 70-300mm is a crap lens, its a decent piece of glass, but IQ is just not there, to me it was always a bit soft and like I said I never got used to the Color rendition from the lens.

I am gonna call you out on that, because that kind of know all, opinionated attitude gets my goat. Especially from folks who talk too much and walk far less.

These Nikkor 70-300mm VR photos (taken handheld while in vehicles that didn't have their engines switched off - with accompanying vibration) - look soft to you and demonstrate inferior IQ to you? 3 out of the 4 were taken at focal lengths outside the 70-300mm's strong area i.e. beyond 200mm.









Inferior IQ compared to what? A 70-200mm VRII + 1.4X TC or a fast prime? I don't know what to say if you are comparing a pro lens with the 70-300mm VR when you talk of IQ. Or perhaps you are subtly or subconsciously trying to convey that since you own many of those droolworthy lenses that have significantly better IQ e.g. the 300 f/2.8, the 70-300mm VR has IQ which is "just not there"?

I was going browsing through this thread, and it seems you have a comment for, and opinion on almost everything. Fine, but those comments just cover what anyone who browses standard photography sites and forums already know. Maybe you had a QC issue with the 70-300mm you had? Or maybe you were unable to get the best out of it, being too dependent on your expensive gear?

Your statements on the 70-300 vs. 55-200 comparison go against what almost every reputed site or Nikon guru says, unless you include Ken Rockwell lol. And from my own experience with the lens I know that either you are blowing hot air on the 70-300mm VR, or are comparing it to significantly higher end lenses which is not a fair comparison.

If you can walk your talk and show some photos that demonstrate that 55-200 takes as good or better photos as the 70-300mm VR between 70-200mm of the spectrum, hell, I will buy an 55-200 immediately just to take advantage of the lesser weight. And why don't you share which other Nikon or Nikon compatible lens - equal price or cheaper than the 70-300VR and covering till 300mm - offers the same level of compromise w.r.t. reach, weight, price and IQ?

Originally Posted by gd1418

My wish list:

200~400 f/4

600 f/4

On my wishlist too. Along with a personal chauffeur driven Gypsy to get the leeway to maneuver those lenses without other folks getting in the way. And along with taking people who file stupid PILs (sunfilm, core area safari ban) to the Sunderbans core area and leaving them there (if you know what I mean).

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Trust me when I say this, Your missing a heap by not having 85mm, be it 1.8 or 1.4, then comes the 135mm f2 DC miracle, it changed the way I did car shots and wedding shots. Its THAT good. I still can`t believe I stayed without it for so long.

Hmmm. Someone shoots primarily in the jungle, and you are giving gyan on why one should look at other lenses that took your photography - which is of a different type - to the next level!

Originally Posted by rajb3125

I understand if you only do jungle and nothing else, everyone has there own fantasy

But if you require reach then I would assume a DX body would be better suited to your needs, I understand you got Dx mode on D800 but still D7000 is much much cheaper than D800

Anything wrong with nature/wildlife shooters? And someone already has a D300s and now has bought the D800, and you talk about the D7000?

You could be a brilliant photographer with the best gear, but your immaturity - the need to jump in with 'expert' comments - comes through if one goes through a few pages of this thread.

"But if you require reach then I would assume a DX body would be better suited to your needs," - what next? Another expert comment such as "I would assume Diesel engines usually have better torque than petrol engines"?

[KameshR]

Quite an interesting discussion going on here!

When I was in the market looking for a budget zoom, a Google search led me to the Dxo Labs website. Here are ratings of the three lenses on a D90.



The ratings could differ when sampled on a different body, but I assume one could get a ballpark of which is optically better according to DxO.

[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by R2D2

I miss the TC that would complete what I call the "poor man's 600mm"

Spot on, its my poor 600mm.

Originally Posted by R2D2

Can't see your kit mate..no pics visible.

Uploaded pics to team-bhp and mods say please upload pics to team-bhp

Lets try adding them again, hopefully this time it works.

Originally Posted by R2D2

I was LOL! when I read this...but seriously mate..the 300mm is not THAT heavy. A pain but not unbearable. Try handshooting with the 400mm F/2.8 or the 600mm F/4 - you would need a glucose drip, respirator + a spare pair of arms.

Trust me when I say this, hand holding 300m for more than few minutes does require more than 2 kidneys.

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

I am gonna call you out on that, because that kind of know all, opinionated attitude gets my goat. Especially from folks who talk too much and walk far less.

Well I do walk and by walk I mean I work full time as a Wedding and Event photographer and its kinda different ball game than in India. Been doing it for almost 8yrs. So if I have an opinion (which I thought i was entitled to), its probably based on my experience in the field. Cannot say about someone else's experience.

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

These Nikkor 70-300mm VR photos (taken handheld while in vehicles that didn't have their engines switched off - with accompanying vibration) - look soft to you and demonstrate inferior IQ to you? 3 out of the 4 were taken at focal lengths outside the 70-300mm's strong area i.e. beyond 200mm.

Attachment 961813

Attachment 961816

Attachment 961817

Attachment 961818

Beautiful pics.

I am not saying 70-300mm is a crap lens, its a decent piece of glass, but IQ is just not there, to me it was always a bit soft and like I said I never got used to the Color rendition from the lens.

I highlighted important bit for you. I thought I was entitled to an opinion, but I guess not in this case.

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

Inferior IQ compared to what? A 70-200mm VRII + 1.4X TC or a fast prime? I don't know what to say if you are comparing a pro lens with the 70-300mm VR when you talk of IQ. Or perhaps you are subtly or subconsciously trying to convey that since you own many of those droolworthy lenses that have significantly better IQ e.g. the 300 f/2.8, the 70-300mm VR has IQ which is "just not there"?

I was going browsing through this thread, and it seems you have a comment for, and opinion on almost everything. Fine, but those comments just cover what anyone who browses standard photography sites and forums already know. Maybe you had a QC issue with the 70-300mm you had? Or maybe you were unable to get the best out of it, being too dependent on your expensive gear?

Your statements on the 70-300 vs. 55-200 comparison go against what almost every reputed site or Nikon guru says, unless you include Ken Rockwell lol. And from my own experience with the lens I know that either you are blowing hot air on the 70-300mm VR, or are comparing it to significantly higher end lenses which is not a fair comparison.

If you can walk your talk and show some photos that demonstrate that 55-200 takes as good or better photos as the 70-300mm VR between 70-200mm of the spectrum, hell, I will buy an 55-200 immediately just to take advantage of the lesser weight. And why don't you share which other Nikon or Nikon compatible lens - equal price or cheaper than the 70-300VR and covering till 300mm - offers the same level of compromise w.r.t. reach, weight, price and IQ?

I never said its inferior, I originally said "Its an amazing lens at a ridiculous budget price. IQ is almost as good as 70-200mm VR1 but AF is a bit slow compared to it. But AF is still plenty good. 50-300 is supposed to be good, but I have no experience with it." don't think I said anything else about 70-300mm, so your comment kinda amazes me.

I will ignore your attitude and put my experience forward. I tried both 70-300mm (slow as a snail AF from film times) and 70-300mm VR which I felt was soft and I did not like the color rendition. As much as I love to use RAW, during events where images need to be turned to organizers with in 4hrs and having over 4000 shots for the day, well cannot do much more than shooting JPEG and getting everything correct in camera.

I cannot show if there is any other lens with 80-400mm range in Nikon line up, does that make current 80-400mm an awesome lens ?

Moreover, I don't go around posting images which I took for someone else and I don't have any Dx lens left bar 12-24mm f4 and 10.5mm f2.8

To me it sounds like your feeling bad about owning 70-300mm because of my not so good experience with it.

And about using expensive gear, I still refuse to use 50mm f1.4 G and keep using 50mm f1.4 Pre Ai, modded for current bodies, even if it doesn't have AF.

I will try finding few images from 55-200mm but please don't hold your breath, I used this lens more than 5yrs ago and it will take some time finding those images.

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

Hmmm. Someone shoots primarily in the jungle, and you are giving gyan on why one should look at other lenses that took your photography - which is of a different type - to the next level!

Anything wrong with nature/wildlife shooters? And someone already has a D300s and now has bought the D800, and you talk about the D7000?

I didn't knew he primarily shot in jungle, so sorry about that. But till someone tries a different gear, he/she won't know how it will impact there style. I know a guy who exclusively shot few weddings with tilt shift lenses, maybe he shouldn't have done it, since he primarily does weddings and tilt shift lenses are for architectural shots.

I shot a drift even on 14-24mm, came out beautiful even few close up pans of bikes were amazing, maybe I should have just stuck to 70-200mm, since that is the lens best suited to drift events.

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

You could be a brilliant photographer with the best gear, but your immaturity - the need to jump in with 'expert' comments - comes through if one goes through a few pages of this thread.

"But if you require reach then I would assume a DX body would be better suited to your needs," - what next? Another expert comment such as "I would assume Diesel engines usually have better torque than petrol engines"?

You read my comment but didn't read the word "assume", and you need to see the actual difference between D300s and D7000 and not just on paper. you also forget to read the rest of the post, where I mentioned extra reach will benefit him over a FF.

Once again Sorry for if something I said offended you, my personal experience with 70-300mm was not so good, so I stopped using it and moved on. If you like your 70-300 then please do keep using it else get something else.

Originally Posted by KameshR

Quite an interesting discussion going on here!

When I was in the market looking for a budget zoom, a Google search led me to the Dxo Labs website. Here are ratings of the three lenses on a D90.

Attachment 961831

The ratings could differ when sampled on a different body, but I assume one could get a ballpark of which is optically better according to DxO.

That much variation could just alone be sensor variation (see D800 vs D800E, but when it comes to price, its a bigger difference than anything else.

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

These Nikkor 70-300mm VR photos (taken handheld while in vehicles that didn't have their engines switched off - with accompanying vibration)

Superb pics as always...and they are amazingly sharp with beautiful colour and contrast.

Originally Posted by KameshR

Quite an interesting discussion going on here!

When I was in the market looking for a budget zoom, a Google search led me to the Dxo Labs website. Here are ratings of the three lenses on a D90.

I'd nearly always prefer the 70-300 VR2 for the simple fact that its a proven performer with a lot of bang for the buck (see Nilanjanray's photos) + it is an FX lens which, if you ever change to FX, will perform well on those cameras too.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Lets try adding them again, hopefully this time it works.

Great kit! Let me guess what lenses those are going from left to right (correct me if I am wrong)

a) 85mm 1.4G AF-S
b) 24-70 F/2.8 AF-S
c) 300mm F/2.8 VR -1
d) The new lenses are in their boxes - one of the lenses on the Nikkor 135mm box is a 50mm 1.4 or 1.8D. What are the other 2? Can't make out. Are they the 24mm F/1.4G and 35mm F/1.4G?
e) 70-200 F/2.8 AF-S VR2
f) 50mm F/1.4 AI-s
g) 70-200 F/2.8 AF-S VR-1 attached to a D700

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Trust me when I say this, hand holding 300m for more than few minutes does require more than 2 kidneys.

It does cause your arms to ache for sure...but nothing too drastic. A 3-4 kg off balance weight, including camera, on your arm can be uncomfortable and you certainly need to put it down after a few minutes. Any of the super teles require a tripod/monopod for extended use.

[gd1418]

By your talks I assume that photography is your bread & butter. It is not mine, but a very very serious hobby that I pursue very passionately.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Well my gear is based on Need + Tax Refunds, I would rather buy more gear then to give money to Tax-man, especially considering I don`t get any benefit out of it.

I predominantly do jungles only. Any other shots other than that of the jungles are generally record shots.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

I understand if you only do jungle and nothing else, everyone has there own fantasy.

Raj, I didn't understand this statement. D800 is a second body. I already have a D300 and I see no need to upgrade my D300. D7000 offers nothing spectacular that D300 doesn't have.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

But if you require reach then I would assume a DX body would be better suited to your needs, I understand you got Dx mode on D800 but still D7000 is much much cheaper than D800.

Why would I handhold a 300 f/2.8 when I don't do so with the 300 f/4? I use a bean bag instead.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

I don`t know anyone who needs a new kidney, although if you wanna handhold a 300mm f2.8, you would need to get 2 extra kidneys, rather than selling one of two you have

Before I could save enough to get the 80~200 f/2.8D, the 70~300 VR I was my stock lens along with the 18~135. And I've taken some good photographs with the 70~300. However, I very firmly believe that while the quality of equipment does matter, it is the person behind the machine who is able to make the machine dance to his/her tunes.

When somebody tells me that my Tiger photo is 'awesome' becasue of the camera and the lens, I only sigh (though would like to wallop on the head with the 300mm) and tell that Bresson, armed with a Leica M rangefinder took B&W pictures that are industry landamrks and I'm nowhere near taking similar shots.

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

These Nikkor 70-300mm VR photos (taken handheld while in vehicles that didn't have their engines switched off - with accompanying vibration) - look soft to you and demonstrate inferior IQ to you? 3 out of the 4 were taken at focal lengths outside the 70-300mm's strong area i.e. beyond 200mm.

I totally agree Nilanjan and I, rather leaving them in the core of Sunderbans would leave them drifting on the Hooghly in a boat in Sunderbans in the night to fend for themselves with the swimming Big Cats around.

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

On my wishlist too. Along with a personal chauffeur driven Gypsy to get the leeway to maneuver those lenses without other folks getting in the way. And along with taking people who file stupid PILs (sunfilm, core area safari ban) to the Sunderbans core area and leaving them there (if you know what I mean).

I have a D300 and not the 's'. I've observed over the past two decades that while the photographs of the wild do get the oohs & aahs, somehow the landscape & portrait photographers get more respect.

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

Hmmm. Someone shoots primarily in the jungle, and you are giving gyan on why one should look at other lenses that took your photography - which is of a different type - to the next level!

Anything wrong with nature/wildlife shooters? And someone already has a D300s and now has bought the D800, and you talk about the D7000?

Going through the ratings it can be safely assumed that the 70-300 is a far better lens than the 55-200 & 55-300.

Originally Posted by KameshR

When I was in the market looking for a budget zoom, a Google search led me to the Dxo Labs website. Here are ratings of the three lenses on a D90.

Attachment 961831

The ratings could differ when sampled on a different body, but I assume one could get a ballpark of which is optically better according to DxO.

[gd1418]

The lens issue is hotting up. Let me change the topic and come back to the Nikon Vs Canon debate.

This picture says it all:

[anantu2001]

Guys,

I've a simple question. I hope to find some answers here.

I'll be leaving to Singapore/Malaysia next month and have plans to purchase a zoom lens for my Sony A33 SLT. I have a standard 18-55 lens which comes along as a kit.

Which zoom lens would you think is best for this?? It has to be similar to Minolta AF 75-300 Beercan. Can you guys suggest to me what other options I have?? I'm still an inexperienced fellow in all this.

Regards,
Anant

[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by R2D2

Great kit! Let me guess what lenses those are going from left to right (correct me if I am wrong)

a) 85mm 1.4G AF-S
b) 24-70 F/2.8 AF-S
c) 300mm F/2.8 VR -1
d) The new lenses are in their boxes - one of the lenses on the Nikkor 135mm box is a 50mm 1.4 or 1.8D. What are the other 2? Can't make out. Are they the 24mm F/1.4G and 35mm F/1.4G?
e) 70-200 F/2.8 AF-S VR2
f) 50mm F/1.4 AI-s
g) 70-200 F/2.8 AF-S VR-1 attached to a D700

Its

a) 85mm 1.4G AF-S
b) 24-70 F/2.8 AF-S
c) 300mm F/2.8 VR -1
d) 12-24mm f4
e) 135mm f2.0 DC
f) 24mm f1.4G
g) 35mm f1.4G
h) 85mm f1.8 D
i) 10.5mm f2.8G DX
j) 70-200mm f2.8 AFS VR2
k) 70-200mm f2.8 AFS VR1 mounted on D700 + MB-D10
l) 50mm f1.4 Pre-Ai, modded to be used on current bodies
m) Gigapan Epic Pro (next image)

Originally Posted by R2D2

It does cause your arms to ache for sure...but nothing too drastic. A 3-4 kg off balance weight, including camera, on your arm can be uncomfortable and you certainly need to put it down after a few minutes. Any of the super teles require a tripod/monopod for extended use.

I tried using 300mm f2.8 handheld for panning shots and after 20-30 mins my pans were getting bad, its best used on a tripod, monopod is alright but for some reason I cannot get used to monopods, but love my monopod for video.

Originally Posted by gd1418

By your talks I assume that photography is your bread & butter. It is not mine, but a very very serious hobby that I pursue very passionately.

Its not exactly my bread and butter, I do spend all my weekends shooting weddings and events but with photography income only supports my gear and travel, if photography wasn`t my passion and didn't help me to remove my stress, I would have never chosen this profession. I also run 2 businesses on the side, which I treat as part time but these provide my bread and butter in the end of the day.

Originally Posted by gd1418

Raj, I didn't understand this statement. D800 is a second body. I already have a D300 and I see no need to upgrade my D300. D7000 offers nothing spectacular that D300 doesn't have.

What I was trying to say was since you need more reach (I assume), a Dx body will be better suited and since D400 is still in rumor phase, it would be wise to get D7000 and then upgrade to D400 when it gets released.

But D800 is nothing to sneeze about, I am hoping to pick one up soon. Its a choice between D800 + slider & controller or D4 and 2 weeks on noodles, not sure yet.

Originally Posted by gd1418

Why would I handhold a 300 f/2.8 when I don't do so with the 300 f/4? I use a bean bag instead.

You can't pan with a bean bag, just jking. I only use 300 handheld, when I am doing location shots otherwise it sits on the tripod.

Originally Posted by gd1418

Before I could save enough to get the 80~200 f/2.8D, the 70~300 VR I was my stock lens along with the 18~135. And I've taken some good photographs with the 70~300. However, I very firmly believe that while the quality of equipment does matter, it is the person behind the machine who is able to make the machine dance to his/her tunes.

When somebody tells me that my Tiger photo is 'awesome' becasue of the camera and the lens, I only sigh (though would like to wallop on the head with the 300mm) and tell that Bresson, armed with a Leica M rangefinder took B&W pictures that are industry landamrks and I'm nowhere near taking similar shots.

I started my journey with a 350D and 18-55mm, soon it got upgraded to Nikon D70s and 18-135, followed by 70-300, followed by 55-200. I guess in my scenario I might have recieved a bad copy of 70-300mm.

I cannot tell how many times I have been told "what an beautiful click, your camera must be expensive..", My usual reply is "yes, picasso also had magic crayons."

And about the head behing the camera, I know few togs whose D3s will focus slower than a snail, just with the settings they have.

Originally Posted by gd1418

The lens issue is hotting up. Let me change the topic and come back to the Nikon Vs Canon debate.

This picture says it all:

Attachment 961923

All I can say is LOL

OFF TOPIC - can anyone recomend a decent repair center in Delhi, my friend borrowed my D3 for his trip and he broke it (water entered through lens mount).

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by rajb3125

a) 85mm 1.4G AF-S
b) 24-70 F/2.8 AF-S
c) 300mm F/2.8 VR -1

Thanks. I was only trying to identify the lenses on display and by sight as the image was too small to read the details on the lenses. So I could could not identify the 10.5mm and 12-24. I assume the new lenses i.e. the 24mm, 35 mm and 135DC are still in their boxes - coz I could have identified had they been outside. I intentionally referred to only the photo w/o the Gigapan.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

- can anyone recomend a decent repair center in Delhi, my friend borrowed my D3 for his trip and he broke it (water entered through lens mount).

Not really off topic as it still pertains to a DSLR. Well, try the Nikon company run service centre in Gurgaon. They are the only people I'd trust with a pro body. Address is:

Plot No. 17, Sector 32, Institutional Area, Gurgaon 122001, Haryana. Phone 0124 4688514, and fax is 4688527

Originally Posted by gd1418

The lens issue is hotting up. Let me change the topic and come back to the Nikon Vs Canon debate. This picture says it all:

Not that I like to bite into this bait but this was irresistible!

No wonder Canon has such so-so ergonomics! Also, after a Nikon I feel I am holding a smooth large pebble (except the 1D series) which can slip outa my hands. I really wish Canon would do something about those shapes.

[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by R2D2

Thanks. I was only trying to identify the lenses on display and by sight as the image was too small to read the details on the lenses. So I could could not identify the 10.5mm and 12-24. I assume the new lenses i.e. the 24mm, 35 mm and 135DC are still in their boxes - coz I could have identified had they been outside. I intentionally referred to only the photo w/o the Gigapan.

24/35 got taken out of the box last night and went for a small shoot today, I can get used to 35 as my main lens. 135DC was taken out ages ago, currently in India with my friend.

Originally Posted by R2D2

Not really off topic as it still pertains to a DSLR. Well, try the Nikon company run service centre in Gurgaon. They are the only people I'd trust with a pro body. Address is:

Plot No. 17, Sector 32, Institutional Area, Gurgaon 122001, Haryana. Phone 0124 4688514, and fax is 4688527

Yep that is where he's going tomorrow 10am.