mark_jordan3

<p>...and I'm sorry, by serial numbers on the images do you mean the file names? </p>

<p>Everything you're describing points to a new body. I've experienced this with other electronic devices; they in a sense "total" the defective unit and simply replace it rather than attempt to fix it...yet still label it as a repair. What's curious though is the issue does not sound that extensive, but who knows...perhaps the root cause entailed an extensive tear down and replacement of hardware that for whatever reason just wasn't efficient to them.<br>

If you want peace of mind, I'd call or e-mail Nikon with your details and concerns. Personally I wouldn't worry about the serial numbers as you have all the supporting paper work.</p>

If your primary concern is working distance I would agree with the common 50mm recommendation, however, I prefer the

bokeh and compression effects achieved with the 85mm and other telephoto ranges. The 85mm 1.8 is my go to portrait

lens on both DX and FX bodies.

<p>There are a few such as the Canon G series that in my opinion are getting close, however, under 100% crop still exhibit water color effect (and other aberrations) to levels I don't see in DSLR images, including my old D1X. But this is all under close inspection...a P&S in your situation would have a number of functional advantages. If you're not printing large, it might make the most sense to go that direction.</p>

<p>The D1X has a 2 gig maximum that can be used; nothing above that will be compatible.</p>

<p>I agree with Kenneth regarding the biography, IMO as your direct/personal site writing in first person has a more expected feel to it. Beautiful images, colors are bright and punchy on my monitor.<br>

Mark</p>

<p>They are both excellent bodies. If you shoot mostly static subjects such as landscapes and macro, consider the F3 for it's mirror lock up and interchangeable prisms. However, best all around would be the F100 offering matrix/spot metering options, auto film advance and auto focus capabilities (just to name a few)...I own both and if forced to choose just one it would be the F100. Good luck with your decision!</p>

<p>You don't offer much information, so the question reads a bit scattered...what focal length was the vintage lens? What need are you attempting to address with this next lens??</p>

<p>While I got many good years of service out of my D2X, after picking up a D700 last year I really can't think of any scenarios under which I'd buy another D2X (except maybe dirt cheap for IR conversion). I'm not one to get spun up over 3" displays and other incremental improvements as pivotal selling points, but hands down the image quality and range of the current generation of cameras are superior. Particularly if you will be shooting professionally I think you owe it to yourself and your customers to use the most up to date equipment within budget. D300 construction is more than adequate for what you'll be doing.</p>

<p>Gene, This body and lens combination right now/brand new from B&H will run you roughly $4,100. If it were me, a $1,200 discount to accept this level of damage wouldn't cut it...over the course of ownership you could easily spend that or more in repairs as problems manifest themselves. Perhaps after obtaining some estimates you could negotiate a lower price in lieu of a full refund...I actually did that very thing with an old TLR I bought years ago and the seller was happy to work with me.</p>

<p>For me it depends upon how extensive the obstruction is. I don't end up doing it very often, but if after all other attempts the only thing standing between the final image I "see"/want and the straight shot is a power pole or similar, I will without hesitation capture the image and edit it out in post processing.<br>

I feel there is no lack of integrity in doing so provided there is full disclosure in instances where it may pose a conflict...such as submission to a contest or where the intended use is editorial.</p>

<p>I've had no issues buying replacements online from "Battery Barn"...around $35 each with a 1 year warranty.</p>

<p>Not sure the squeal has anything to do with aging, both my 17-35mm and 300mm AFS did it brand new out of the box...as it has for many others. Regularly used mine do not squeal, if they sit unused for some time (a month or so) they'll squeal a bit, but it'll disappear. Whenever it happens I point the lens to the sky so it'll "hunt" a few cycles and then it's gone. It's really the strangest thing, but I've called Nikon multiple times on it and they insist there's nothing at risk to the lens.</p>

<p>An aquaintance of mine converted his G5 through Lifepixel and the results I saw digitally projected were very good. I have a G5 myself, but converted an old D1X instead which has a similar megapixel count. The G5 is a great camera, but I think 11x14 and 12x18 prints is pushing it...especially with IR images which out of the camera tend (at least in my experience) to be a bit on the soft side.<br>

And you're spot on...once the good morning light is gone, switch to IR.</p>

Bob, Ed is correct...the highest capacity card a D1X will accept is 2 GB.

Proper exposure along with post processing noise reduction (like Neat Image or Noise Ninja) I have

averaged acceptable high ISO results with the D2x, but the majority of the images I shoot...and care

about the most are taken at low ISO. If you want the best high ISO results straight out of the camera, it

would seem to me the D300 would be the best choice...IMO an extra stop is significant enough

justification. I actually prefer the heft of the D2x for balance, but there have been many occasions where

it would have been great to break down the grip for transporting in a smaller bag.

Not the smallest P&S, but my old Canon G5 has a remote...has good manual control capabilities as

well which could be valuable in an application like this.

I've used both, F100 hands down. Considering what an F100 can be picked up for on today's used

market, to me, it's a no brainer.

My only experience is with the PME5 which I've been very happy with...that at today's used prices could

likely be picked up within your budget. I had also contemplated the Kiev offerings to save a few bucks,

but the reviews were often mixed apparently due to sample variation. Perhaps just a force of habit from

initially using the WLF, but I don't frequently use the prism meter preferring to take my readings with a hand held instead. Enjoy your new rig Richard!!

Jack, PS 7 was introduced I believe back in 2002 and has long since retired. CS3 launched in

2007...So wherever you're finding PS7 it's either used or old stock. I've leap frogged my upgrades

starting with PS 6, then CS and now CS3. I know plenty of people who still happily use PS 7...I was

actually pretty satisfied myself with CS until I purchased a DSLR Adobe did not offer the RAW plugin for

in that version. The list get's too long to cover here, but the differences between CS3 and even CS are

significant...HDR...Bridge...lens correction filters just to name a few that might be of interest. If you do

shoot in RAW, make sure the version you choose has a plugin available to support your camera.

<i>"Is there an accessory that can help me better balance the whole setup (lens-converter-camera) on

the tripod?"</i>

<br><br>

Prasoon--The only thing I can think of would be attaching a QR slide bar underneath to adjust the center

of balance. But honestly I think it starts to take the overall compensation of the problem to extremes

you would grow tired of quickly.

<i>"The ones who obsess over lens quality only ever seem to take pictures of their cats."</i><br><br>

Ooo-kay...I'm outta here...

True, it does take time to build up an arsenal of high quality glass, but I don't think placing so-so optics

in front of a high end DSLR makes sense. If right now the D700 is a must, I would personally postpone

the zoom idea and as an interim solution go near-super wide with the 24mm AFD. I have the 17-35mm

and still use this lens often.

Likely the weakest link in your setup is the particular pan/tilt head, but if your images are not suffering I don't see much point in forcing the early upgrade. As a low cost solution, you could try draping a small sand bag over the top of the lens' tripod collar.

Matt,<br>

I second Jose's thoughts. I would personally prioritize by what will give me the best out of focus areas (bokeh) leveraging my strongest lenses. If space is not an issue at a given location, my recommendation would be to use the 80-200mm f2.8 set somewhere between 80 to 130mm. Next would be the 50mm or 28mm primes. Just remember that while a 50mm is a 75mm in DX format, it's in perspective only...bokeh behaves the same as if mounted to a full frame camera. At anyrate, I think you certainly can achieve great results with what you already own.