thomas_k.

<blockquote>

<p>Anyway- <strong>what, in your your own opinion makes a good photo, one you are happy with, a successful photo?</strong><br /> For example...what response do you aim for in your audience...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I have no audience, nor am I aiming my photos to one. A good photo is the one that satisfies me. I take photos like others talk to themselves or sing while taking a shower.</p>

<p>Look at the bright side of things. You held up with film until now and you can get digital camera which is a mature technology now and it's better than 35mm film.</p>

<p>Not every wedding has to be a grueling 10hrs+ job. You can target for shorter 3-4 hour, ceremony and post-ceremony portraits gigs and see how that feels.</p>

<p>Also if you are planning to shoot landscapes with this lens and use apertures f16 or smaller it may blur/soften image on both DX and full frame.</p>

<p>Christina,<br>

If there is an art or design school in your area, take some photography/art/photoshop classes. </p>

<p>What is Nikons reasoning for a dedicated quality button on the back of the camera? Anybody changes image size/quality as often as ISO or WB?</p>

<p>Personally I do not think of photography as a hobby. For me it's a passion, a way of personal expression and place for studies of other photographers work. I would rather compare myself to a writer or a painter who also holds another full time occupation in order to not become a "starving artist".</p>

<p>One of "road warriors" just hmm....farted?</p>

<p>Shun,<br>

Is comparison of D700 and D800 right? I feel like D600 was D700's replacement. Then question would be: how success of these 2 cameras measure up? Also if D300 successor was D7000 series: how successful was it? Any numbers on cameras sold? There is a huge pressure on nikon (and canon) from smartphone use and (fast improving) mirrorless offers from other makers. Can both companies survive catering only to top end pro photographers who will buy D4, D810? If portrait, school, wedding, product and serious amateur photographers go mirror-less (nikon is not leading in that department) then what?</p>

<p>Nikon got it right with D300 and D700. Should have continued that way.</p>

<p>It is obviously made for scientific research but it makes me wonder how many photos are created by electronic devices which are never seen by a single human being. What is a reason of their existence? Are they like a natural phenomena, grains of sand arranged and removed by the wind? Can they even be called photographs if no one ever see them?</p>

<p>I was also surprised/disappointed when I received X10 (I use DSLR's with battery grips for paid assignments). I got used to the size since, it's a great tool. Enjoy.</p>

<p>Looks to me more like a jellyfish of a lens ;)</p>

<p>Isn't perfect landscape photography a bit like perfect nude photography? There is not much to it after first positive impression. Imperfect bodies and landscapes hold more interest for me.</p>

<p>Photographs also can present unexpected and unintended facets of the subject. If we photoshop everything to our liking we loose this quality of the medium.</p>

<p>I do feel that many idealized landscape photographs (and films) can create a false perception of existence of pristine, unchanged by humans parts of our planet - while in fact they are not. It is important for (especially city dwellers) in my country: US to be aware that wast majority of land is irretrievably transformed from it's natural state. Our national parks are really only small islands left for us to visit. Beautiful images of nature should not detract us from efforts of needed preservation. I think we all have some responsibility to photograph not only the "good" by also the "bad".</p>

<p>Placing quality button on back panel next to ISO button was (and is) one of blunders Nikon did with D600 camera design. It is way too easy to press it when you want to change ISO or WB. Qual button on the top of camera (like D800, D300 or d700) is a much better solution. On D600 it is easy to inadvertently go from RAW to JPEG Small with disastrous consequences.</p>

<p>Try shooting the fuji at f.5.6 1/80 of a second. Is same light scenario you are describing your ISO will go down to about 1200 - with much better results. Personaly I like to use fuji at no more than ISO800. I will go higher only if I run out of aperture/shutter speed options.</p>

<p>There were 2 Russian guys who made a baby chimpanzee push a button on camera and stated that resulting photos are made by fore mentioned ape. Things can be tricky. If a surveillance camera produces acclaimed photo/video, who is the author to receive the honors?</p>

<p>Unless I missed focus or have motion blur and I'm trying to salvage the shot, I never use additional sharpening in post production. I even tend to lower default cameras sharpening.</p>

<p>Another option is shooting in your camera's B&W mode. Newer cameras (ex:Fujifilm X-E1) have several options of using "filters" red, yellow, green and results in my opinion can be very good. This approach gives less flexibility at editing stage but it is closer to B&W film shooting experience - you never capture color image, it's B&W through whole process. X-E1 thanks to it's EVF viewfinder lets you even see black and white while you are framing and focusing - great feature in my experience.</p>

<p>Outside of the realm of monetary gratification, what validates (makes worthwhile, satisfies) photographer and his/hers work? What makes a photographer feel like he or she accomplished something? I'm asking this question because personally I do not know, I have not experienced feeling of accomplishment in my (non-commercial) work. Have you? Any thoughts or links to writing on this subject?<br>

Thomas</p>

<p>If you are using more than one strobe, they might not fire in sync - thus double exposure result. See if you are getting same result with one strobe, also make sure that there is no other strong (video?) light on your model.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I bought a new Nikon D7100</p>

</blockquote>

<p>and</p>

<blockquote>

<p>This wedding I took on, I charged $325</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You paid your own money and donated your time to photograph this couple's wedding. Are there couples in your area that are ready to pay you $2000 for same work you just did? Can you find 30 such couples a year? If yes - you have a business, if not have another bread-winning job and keep shooting $325 weddings.</p>

<p>You could mount in lens opening a photo of something almost as dear to you as the Leica camera: your wife, children, dog or else.</p>