vorlandphotography

<p>I know this is elementary, but be sure you're uploading high resolution images. A friend had the result you describe when she uploaded files to Shutterfly that had been previously been saved for e-mailing.</p>

<p>I know it's all relative, but I just paid $300 less for the 5D Mark II than what I paid a couple of years ago for the 5D.</p>

<p>I use 85mm f/1.8 on my 5D almost exclusively for portraits, and I shoot a lot of em. I agree that the 50mm is better on 40D.</p>

<p>They don't call the FM3a "the poor man's Leica" for nothing. It's capable or producing world class images, still. I know photojournalists who continue to use it an alternaative in extreme conditions (such as the -50 windchills were experience up North). I bought mine and a full array of lenses on e-Bay, for peanuts. Shoot several rolls of slide film through it every year, just for old time's sake.</p>

<p>Nikon's customer base is going to be increasingly limited to the top end for the next period of time ... providing highest end gear to top end professionals whose companies stake their equipment buys. It's folks like us -- consumers who fund our own equipment, who are adverse to spending money right now. Price increases don't effect our decision much -- we just ain't buying new stuff at the moment, regardless of the price.</p>

<p>85mm 1.8. I've forgotten what I paid for it, but it was peanuts when contrasted with other options. These days I use it mostly for portrait work with my 5D.</p>

<p>It is hard to grasp, but when the Copyright laws were changed some years back, there was a complete reversal of the old rule that if someone paid a photographer to shoot pictures, the pictures belonged to the person who paid, unless agreed otherwise. THAT IS NO LONGER TRUE. Except in very narrow circustances, which do not seem to apply here, Joe is correct that he has a very good case. Probably a slam dunk case. I learned about this after I was out of the PR business for a few years, got back into it, and hired a photographer. Things had changed in the interiml.<br>

"See a lawyer" is, of course, a good rule. But please, don't pontificate to Joe when you know nothing more than the common wisdom. As Mark Twain, I think, said, "common wisdom is not wise, only common."</p>

<p>I live in North Dakota, where it gets REALLLY cold.  Never a problem with my FM2(n).  This camea was one of the mainstays of photojournalism for years. Besides, it remains the poor man's Leica.  Get one now while you still can.</p>

The 28-135 is a pretty good lens ... I used it lot when I shot film. But it's at the end of it's life cycle, I think. It did not stand up particuarly well to heavy use, and I eventually sold it. The 17-40L is a great lens. I used it frequently with my 10D and 20D, and it has become a real work horse with my 5D.

Every serious photographer should own the f/2.8L, for all the reasons cited here. It

is a truly mystical lens.

The FM2n is a wonderful camera yet today ... and it works at -30F temperature we sometimes experience in North Dakota. The poor man's Leica, and once many a photojournalist's good right hand. I bought mine and for lenses on eBay a couple of years ago. Shoot a Canon 5D in every day life ... but every now and then I get out the Nikon and shoot some slides.

70-200/2.8 IS, of course, on my 5D. It's a truly mystical lens, worth

every hard-earned dollar I paid for it.

Shutter lag and occasional focusing difficulties on the 10D drove me crazy, as well as its dust propensity . But it created some wonderful images for me. 6Meg is plenty if you compose carefully and don't need to crop. I've gone up to 11x14 with a properly exposed image.

This camera is the poor man's Leica. I shoot mostly digital today, but I can resist a few rolls of color slides every now and then. Check out E-bay for lenses. I'm almost embarassed about the low prices I paid there for some of the world's finest glass.

It's pointnless speculating, but all the signs indicate there is a 5D upgrade coming soon. Many of us are going to buy it, which means there will be a lot of very good used first edition 5Ds (including mine) on the market.

I vote for the FM2n, the poor man's Leica. You can work around the wonderful sound of its shutter.

I know this sounds snobish, but if you're dealing with clients who know anything at all about digital photography, you're gonna look like a dork (as my daughter would say) walking into an important shoot with a bottom of the line camera, even if it's a Canon. As a backup, OK.

I've been using the STE2 for years ... the manual is practically worthless. By all means, go to the link Julian suggests ... the "recipes" there take you through the various scenarios in reasonably corherent fashion.

Thanks for the responses, guys. Very helpful. I'm now shooting the 5D. Kristi is a young adult and is rapidly learning the nuances of digital photography. She's into wildlife and landscape photography, and is becoming interested in "the patterns of nature, closeup," flowers, tiny critters, etc. I'm probably leaning towards buying something we can both use.

My daughter is having loads of fun with my hand-me-down 20D. Macro photography

is an emerging interest for her, and a birthday is not far off. I'd

appreciate recommendations for a starter macro-capable lens for her kit ...

something I could perhaps pick up on the used market without breaking the bank?

I suspect lots do -- I picked up a cheapie in West Yellowstone once after I had dropped the ET-74 down a canyon.

I've owned both the 10D and 20D, and bought the 5D last time the rebate came out. Excellent cameras, but not nearly in the same league as the 5D. I shoot portraits, fashion, landscapes, street, some sports. It's wonderful shooting full frame again. Actually, my favorite lens these days is my least expensive, the 50 mm 1.4. Also own 17-40L, 85, 70-200L. Get the 5D and don't look back.

I've owned both the f/4 (pre-IS, of course) and 2.8. So far as I am concerned, the 2.8 is a mystical and strange and wonderful piece of gear. I don't understand the optics involved here, but, at least in my case, the 2.8 is vastly superior.

I started with the 420EX and upgraded to a pair of 550s and later 580s ... but I kept one of the 420s and still use it occasionally in multiple flash setups controlled by a ST-E2 transmitter.

I hope Ken Thalheimer and others like him reconsider their decisions to not post new images. Many of us without his skills regard Ken as one of the finest photographers on Photonet who often volunteers very constructive criticism of our work.