johnmyers

<p>You have two lenses that will serve you just fine for a while or at least until you are better able to make a call as to what you really want from a good and expensive lens. I'd suggest getting the SB600. A hotshoe flash unit really opens up SO MANY doors to great indoor and outdoor lighting. Once you have it, experiment with it, and use it appropriately - you'll kick yourself for even considering not buying it.</p>

<p>Melinda, the 50mm 1.8 is a phenomenal lense and remains one of my favorites to this day. It is awesome in low light, the sharpness is nearly unbeatable, and the field is so flat - truly keeps straight lines straight - all of this at such a bargain price.<br>

A suggestion though... if you want to save a little money and weight in your camera bag and don't need the lower end of the 80-200...try the Nikon 180mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF. You can read reviews on that on B&H or search through google. I bought this lens years ago and can't possibly imagine parting with it. It's (relatively) cheap and is so damn sharp with perfect contrast/colors/bokeh, etc. </p>

<div></div>

<p>The camera you already own will be perfectly capable for what you need it to do. You should invest in some good medium telephoto lenses for portrait work. Something fairly long (85mm-180mm) with as low an aperture you can get (2.8 and lower would be desirable, as you can really isolate your subject when stopped that wide open). As for weddings or more variable environments, a good (constant aperture 2.8) medium zoom would be a wise investment): the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L USM comes to mind.</p>

<p>I suppose there's nothing you can do about it. It helps to be on other people's "I'm kinda interested in your photos" lists, but if you're like me and this hasn't happened and probably never will, then I guess we're stuck with no ratings and no critiques for a while. It's such a high volume site; while that's an advantage in some respects it's also a huge disadvantage for those wanting some honest critique when so few are willing to give it.</p>

<p>Thank you, Jin. Good to know the reason for the errors.</p>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

Nikon D50, Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D<div></div>

<p>Thank you all so much for the comments. You've all been a great help to me.</p>

<p>Thank you for the fast response, J. Harrington; I appreciate it. Yeah, by warp I just meant the normal film curl but couldn't find such an appropriate term as you have. Good to know about the colors still being a little off with even a top-of-the-line scanner. I always expect to do post-scan work, but my old scanner I suppose just made it take that much longer. I wish I could do a side by side comparison between my old scanner and the 5000 so I can really see if it's worth the money for the difference. I suppose the sharpness would alone make it worth it, since colors aren't too terribly hard to correct. I've been using my D50 but want the dynamic range of film, so I've been itching to bring out my N80 again...but scanner woes have been keeping me from that, as I like to have my images on my computer. So I was hoping a new scanner would solve that, or I guess I could save up for a full frame sensor DSLR and ditch film (save for B&W) years down the road...</p>

<p>I'm looking to buy a film scanner again and am in desparate need of advice. My old scanner was a Minolta-Dimage Scan Dual II from back in 2002. It was decent for it's time, but so very frustrating as well. The colors were hardly ever true and the focus was almost always soft. I spent on average 1-2 hours per scan-to-final-product getting it back to it's exact original as-on-slide/negative state. The main problem with the scanner was its softness in parts of the image and the inconsistancy in colors despite coming from similar scenes on the same roll. Getting two similar images to match one another was a...challenge.<br>

So now I'm looking for a scanner again, seven years later. I'm considering the Nikon Super Coolscan 5000 ED, but I refuse to put down that money if the scans will follow same suit as they did on my old scanner. So does anyone have any experience with this scanner? How does it handle mounted slides that may be slightly warped? Is it sharp across the entire image? Are the colors consistant with what the actual slide looks like under a light table?<br>

I am wanting to buy this because I want to use my film camera more, and I know I would if I had some way to get my images on my computer without the hassles I had in the past. I just want to be sure I'm using the money wisely. I can spend $1200 for a god of a machine or a bust, and I'd like to know which it is. Or I can spend twice that, and thus wait even longer, and get a D700 which may or may not take me away from film (at least color film, that is) completely.<br>

Any advice at all?</p>

<p>If you're willing to try a slide film, try Fuji Provia 100. It's very sharp with stunning colors that will work for flesh tones as well as landscape tones.<br>

If you want a faster print film that works beautifully in any environment, try Fuji NPH 400 @ 320. It's phenomenal. You really must try it to believe it.</p>

<p>I have the D50 digital and N80 film cameras, as well as the old Nikon Coolpix 3200 P&S. I still use all of them for all photographs I take. The only problem I have with the D50 is how it doesn't quite capture both extremes of highlight and shadow detail in a single frame the way film does. The new "pro" digital bodies combat this nicely and it's basically the only reason I want to upgrade. I guess another reason would be so I can use my awesome 20mm 2.8 Nikkor prime for digital as I do film. With the DX size sensor, it's rarely all that useful, so that's another reason for me to upgrade to FX. Unfortunately I don't have the money to do so, so we'll see about doing so sometime in the next few years.<br>

My N80 is just perfect and I'll never part with it. And the 3200 still works like it did since day one.</p>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>I'm getting 503 errors as well, about once every other link I click.</p>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

Split Rock Lighthouse, MN<div></div>