neil_parker

These symptoms aren't clear to me, but the first thing I would check is that the counter on

the MD-4 is set to the orange dot, not to a number.

Lex, I think that camera already exists: the D300. Certainly I have found my D200 to be a

suitable substitute for an F3 in almost every way except for the big viewfinder. A small

prime can be used on it just as on a film camera. I hope that eventually Nikon will offer a

D300 type camera with a DX sensor and viewfinder.

If the D200/300 is still too big, then a D80 or D40x can be used if a photographer is

willing to accept the compromises of a less pro build.

Pick up an F2 with motor drive, battery pack and a bag full of fast primes, then tell me that

rig is heavy...

This card reader is for Compact Flash cards and won't work with your SD cards, exchange

it for an SD card reader.

Mac OSX does not require a special driver for card readers.

"Sorry I got you to notice something you had not in the past!"

That's OK Kip, it's still easier to deal with than the teeny light and line-encrusted display of

my D200:). I really miss using the big viewfinders of the F2 and F3.

The prism halves blackout is normal on f3.5 and slower lenses, try centering your eye

better on the viewfinder. Different copies of the same lens shouldn't make a difference,

just how your eye is centered. Or replace it with a plain or grid screen:).

I viewed through my pair of F2's and although I never noticed it before, there is a very faint

out-of-focus something barely visible at the center of the bottom edge of the screen. It

was more visible with a slower f3.5 micro and less visible with a faster lens. This was with

an F2 Photomic (DP-1 finder) and a plain prism version. So I deem it normal!

This trend began in appx. 1990 with the EOS 1 and it's superior autofocus. It continued

with Canon's advantage in long lenses, IS etc. Nikon pissed away it's pro leadership and

sealed the grave with poor marketing and pro support, shortages of essential gear, etc.

etc. The D3 looks wonderful, but I bet it takes years if at all for Nikon to regain much

ground with sports and PJ.

If you have a lot of film to scan, it will save you bucks to have a scanner handy in the long

run. But be prepared to spend a whole lot of time; e.g. 3min each (optimistic!) for 2000

frames comes to 100 hrs of work.

Jacob, i already answered your question on how this was happening, you need to set your

workflow option to 16 bit in ACR (Adobe Camera Raw), when you convert your NEF to be

opened in CS2.

As to your other question, it certainly does matter. If you convert your files to 8 bit, you

are throwing away a lot of information in your file, and limiting the amount of adjustments

you can make without causing artifacts or clipping. I did a quick google search: 'photo 8

bit vs 16 bit' and this was the first hit, a useful explanation:

http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/8bit-versus-16bit-difference.html

Note that D200 NEF files are 12 bit, and to maintain all the information they must be

opened as 16 bit files, not 8 bit. However if you aren't making heavy changes or

corrections, then 8 bit may be adequate. Your desktop printer doesn't care if you throw an

8 bit or 16 bit file at it, but if you are sending files to an outside printer, they may have

requirements, such as an sRGB jpeg or something.

I don't think a P&S camera is the answer for this kind of task. While I am not very

knowledgeable either in this subject, I do know that rigs I have seen in the past consist of

an SLR camera, a longer macro lens (sometimes with bellows) and a ring light ( a circular

flash that surrounds the lens to give shadowless lighting.

I urge you to seek more technical forums that deal with this if you don't get the answers

here.

My question would be, how useable is the D300 manual? My frustration with the D200

manual was in the weird organisation, the stilted grammar and the tiny illustrations and

type that are hard to read for someone like me in my 50s. I gave up on it and use the PDF

on my laptop, in which I can at least enlarge the diagrams (higher resolution than the print

version) and search easily.

OK, so you are shooting raw NEFs it seems, and bringing them into Photoshop CS2 or CS3

I assume. (Help us out with some info eh...). They have to be converted by ACR (Adobe

Camera Raw) to open in PS, So you must have your workflow option set to 8 bit instead of

16 bit in ACR.

Are you shooting raw files (NEFs)? They will be 12 bit, and will open as 16bit in PS or

Capture. If you are shooting jpegs, they are 8 bit.

My D200 came with a little plastic cap intended to be slid onto the eyepiece. I bet I still

have it somewhere in the original packaging...

Bryan, the final production DP-2 finder didn't have a silver button for checking battery on

the front either. It exhibits a few cosmetic differences from this prototype. The F2 became

an F2S with this viewfinder. The big difference of course, is that the DP-2 uses LED meter

readout versus a needle in the DP-1.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/nikonfinder/f2dp2.htm

Next time you break copyright by scanning a book :) you should run a de-screening filter

to make it more discernible.

Does the cable release have an adjustment? The better ones normally can be adjusted to

fit by turning the base of the piece that screws into the camera.

-don't expect miracles from walgreens jpegs, you have blown highlights and clipped

shadows. Scan them yourself for the best results. With care and practice, equal or better

results compared to digital raw files can be achieved, at least at below 800 ISO.

-18-200 on a fullframe film camera? I don't think so... maybe a 28-200?

-please don't make me look at dog snapshots, this isn't the leica forum...:)

Arjun, you do have it backwards. The city of Jena ended up in E. Germany and the Carl

Zeiss name copyright ended up in the W. Germany branch of Zeiss. So eventually the E.

German versions were called C.Z. or 'aus Jena' after they lost the copyright battle.

More info here down the page under 'Major exacta lens makers"

http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/exakta/lenses.html

>30K actuations, now we have someone who has really used the camera reviewing it.

Actually at 9fps that's less than an hour of shooting:)

5D with an F mount? Yes please!! The sooner the better.

Perfect for shooting concerts!

The D3 sounds great, unfortunately for now it's unknown, unavailable and unaffordable...

>The Canon AE-1 cost roughly $630 with a 50mm f/1.8 when introduced in 1976.

Daniel, the quoted price at that link was with the 50mm f1.4 not the 1.8 and was a

japanese price. I sold these darn things at a store in about 80/81; 200-300 was typical for

an SLR body. Maybe 400+ for the mighty nikon F2. I think I paid about $225 for my first

real camera, an OM-1. Although admittedly that's a guess after all these years.