jim_britt1

I had a fire in my office and was able to upgrade via insurance to a 5d Mark III... gave my daughter the 5D... she loves it, and I find the Mark III just fine for everything and I would not go any further in buying new, Sony etc., I also have Leica M9 and M10. with the software available now I don't see how anyone needs anything else. lightroom etc. it's so easy now compared to when I was making my living shooting. And egads, the phones!!!!

Steve Huff just posted two articles regarding his choice of a used Mac Pro v an iMac with comparable capacity.

 

I am now using an iMac, 4 core, 32 GB memory, 4 TB combo drive for business, which is photography, audio and video editing (plus bookkeeping). In terms of speed, the iMac does just fine, and the 5K monitor is spectacular. It does huff and puff a bit when rendering video for DVDs and MP4s.

 

Huff's reasons for going with a Mac Pro was for reliability. In his opinion, the iMac is not intended of heavy usage, and has a life of about 3-4 years in that role. His experience with a Mac Pro is about twice that estimate. The Mac Pro is much easier to repair and keep up to date, whereas the only thing you can change in the iMac is the memory, and that only with the 27" version.

 

I reserve the internal hard drive for software and scratch memory. Most programs use the primary drive even if you offload some duties to external drives. For project work, storage and archives, I use external drives. I have a 5 bay USB3 box for this. I also have a 20 TB DROBO drive (sort of a RAID) for backups and long term storage. For things that need to be fast, I have a 5 bay Thunderbolt drive with a 1 TB SSD in slot 1.It's handy for editing and rendering video, which can take 150 GB or more for a multi-camera shoot and bog down slower drives.

 

Networking and sharing is very easy with the iMac, and I presume the Mac Pro. The learning curve is relatively shallow, and there is plenty of help in various forums.

I'm also wondering if I can boot the iMac 27 (same set up as yours) from and external HD running )OS 10.6.8 so I can scan with Nikon Scan.

I just had a fire in my new office, an electrical fire and smoke damage to my equipment. Looks as if I'll have to replace my 2009 Mac Pro with 32GB memory, 4 hard drives equaling almost 6.5 Terabytes. I'm just wondering if anyone is using a new iMac for their work.

<p>i just purchased a 5d Mark III body only as I had a 5d and the 24-105. the Mark III is a big step up not only 22.3 mgps but in terms of ergonomics, battery life, all in all a great camera. I also shoot in the studio and I expect to see the improvements in the newer sensor. I purchased it on ebay for $1750 with 4 batteries, box, cards etc. A great camera.</p>

<p>What ever film you use, have it developed and then scanned, so you have a proof sheet and a cd with at least their medium scans... it's amazing what you can pull up and do with photoshop : ) best of all possible worlds.</p>

<p>as a professional, I worked with R4 through R6 and loved the 80 1.4, 90 2.0, 60 2.8 and the 180 2.8 also the 280 2.8 was amazing. Unfortunately with the change in auto focus and working on film sets a lot more, I had to change to the Canon system. I did however go back to an R6 with my favorite 90 2.0 for portraits, I still have them as well as a 24mm 2.8. I could do so much with the 90. In the days of Kodachrome, at the labs you could tell with a glance the difference between my Leica R shots and the Nikon/Canon shots. Ah, back in the day.<br>

R6 and R4sp are great choices.</p>

<p>Digilux 1, but you know, it was fun and cute. M9... serious. But in 2001 I wasn't sure Leica would ever make it to digital. I'm loving the 9. My first Leica was an M3, bought in 1962 at Brooks Camera's in San Francisco my home town. Bought it on time same as my friend Jim Marshall. Never bought anything that small and that expensive before. Actually could say that about the M9. But it feels great!</p>

<p>first digital and newest</p><div></div>

<p>I bought my Rolex in 1985 ( someone thought it was a bi-centenial watch... red and blue bezel) and just now bought the M9 to replace my 1972 M4... get the M9. My Seiko keeps better time. Now I feel I am doing photography again. I've had a Canon5d for a long time and it's good, but this is an adventure.</p>

<p>I bought my Rolex in 1985 ( someone thought it was a bi-centenial watch... red and blue bezel) and just now bought the M9 to replace my 1972 M4... get the M9. My Seiko keeps better time. Now I feel I am doing photography again. I've had a Canon5d for a long time and it's good, but this is an adventure.</p>

<p>I bought my Rolex in 1985 ( someone thought it was a bi-centenial watch... red and blue bezel) and just now bought the M9 to replace my 1972 M4... get the M9. My Seiko keeps better time. Now I feel I am doing photography again. I've had a Canon5d for a long time and it's good, but this is an adventure.</p>

<p>I bought my Rolex in 1985 ( someone thought it was a bi-centenial watch... red and blue bezel) and just now bought the M9 to replace my 1972 M4... get the M9. My Seiko keeps better time. Now I feel I am doing photography again. I've had a Canon5d for a long time and it's good, but this is an adventure.</p>

<p>the 105 2.5 was an awesome lens for portraits and many other shots... the 85 1.8 was a little more flexible, but not as good for portraits as the 105... legendary lens.</p>

<p>I purchased this extender and then a week or so later purchased a Canon EF 300 1:4 L lens. The lens auto focuses, but does not with the extender. Should it and is it the lens or the extender?<br>

Thanks,<br>

Jim Britt</p>

<p>Number one, it's a soft edged shadow, number two the reflection in the glasses shows that it was a round "box" etc., no dot meaning a flash head in the middle... it was slightly off to the right side of the camera and flash speed fast enough to stop motion. Pretty easy to do.</p>

<p>Number one, it's a soft edged shadow, number two the reflection in the glasses shows that it was a round "box" etc., no dot meaning a flash head in the middle... it was slightly off to the right side of the camera and flash speed fast enough to stop motion. Pretty easy to do.</p>

<p>My first "good" camera... f stops, shutter speeds and zone focusing, Petri Half Frame Jr. Some fun!</p>

I had great results with the Coolscan 4000, having prints made up to 20x30, mostly Tri X. My 4000 was stolen (alone with

a computer, monitor etc.) and I up graded to a Mac Pro and the Nikon Coolscan 9000 with the glass holder. I've had great

results there too. I'm not a fan of ICE and so I clean the neg as best I can and then really take time to clean it up in

photoshop. I've sold 20x30's of this shot and when you get it up that big you can not hide imperfections... I used Genuine

Fractals to upscale.<div></div>

I had great results with the Coolscan 4000, having prints made up to 20x30, mostly Tri X. My 4000 was stolen (alone with

a computer, monitor etc.) and I up graded to a Mac Pro and the Nikon Coolscan 9000 with the glass holder. I've had great

results there too. I'm not a fan of ICE and so I clean the neg as best I can and then really take time to clean it up in

photoshop. I've sold 20x30's of this shot.

I've had great luck with IT Supplies, prices, shipping etc. In fact bought my Epson 4800 and 3800 from them.

I can't get my Nikon 9000 or Epson 3200 to show up in Import. I just migrated to the MacPro, and have reinstalled a number of times, put

the plug in's in the plug in folder in CS3m but they don't show up. 'course I had no problems with my old G4. Help! Nikon Scan by itself

also won't run.

and then the cropped image... actually I cropped it in Nikon scan<div></div>

Just and FYI... I've seen some questions on whether you could get the full 35mm w sprocket holes... this is with the Nikon 9000.

I used one of the masks that came with the rotatiing film holder<div></div>

I use an epson 4900 as well as the 3200 (different homes) and have had success with the emulsion side down and

masking with black paper (double weight). I've done this with both 35mm and sprockets and 6x6 with the black edge etc.

My coolscan 4000ED was stolen and I have to replace it... majority of work is 35mm, but some

important 2 1/4 as well. I've been relatively happy with the Epson 4900 for some of that, but know

that the 9000 would be bettert. What are the results with 35mm? Anyone using it for both?

Jim Britt