remco-jan.woldhuis

With "modern" tools like Lightroom and Aperture I don't see any reason to shoot in jpeg anymore. With these tools it's just

as easy to create images from raw as it is from jpegs. Als storage is not an issue anymore. Memory cards hardly cost

anything anymore.

Buying the full RTU as itis today is only relevant if you need Photoshop on a daily basis. If you only meed it every now

and then renting is a good option. And they have another valid argument against piracy.

Or this: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=26829

What's the rational of removing pixels already at exposure? It takes about 2 seconds to crop in post processing and that

gives you additional freedom to optimize the composition.

<p>Live view uses a different AF method than "normal AF". For the normal AF the focus sensor in the bottom of the camera body is used. Since there is no connection between this AF sensor and the image sensor, differences may occur. Focus accuracy is very dependent on the correct calibration of the camera mechanics.<br>

When using live view, the actual image sensor is used for AF. There is no mechanical dependency in this case. </p>

The best camera is the one that you take with you and actually use. If you don't like carrying around a huge pro-camera,

take a more compact camera like the NEX. You could also consider the Olympus OM-D or Pen e-p3. They are my

favorites at the moment. The disadvantae of the NEX (imho) is that you still have relatively big lenses. Olympus does not

have that disadvantage.

Did you clean the lens and camera contacts?

<p>Does anyone know how companies like Adobe of DXO get the lens data they use for their lens correction features? Do they measure all lenses on the market or are they using available data from manufacturers or something else?<br>

Not important, but I'm just curious..... </p>

Another proofpoint that plastic is not inferiour to metal. It can even be the other way around: a metal construction could

have been damaged because it cannot stand impact as good as modern plastics.

<p>Another cost parameter is the wafer usage. Wafers have fixed dimensions (circular). The smaller the chip is, the more efficient real estate usage is possible. When producing 36x24mm chips, there's a lot of unused space on the wafers.</p>

I guess the bigger power supply in larger bodies also helps with improving the af speed.

<p>"Reading the numerous posts about the lens jamming on a loose screw and the ribbon cable cracking..."<br>

"Numerous" doesn't say anything about the quality. People don't post when the lens works as it should, but if 100 or 1000 people globally post a problem you get a huge list of problems in Google. In real life this is still nothing compared to the number of units sold. So experiences found on the Web are useless to draw any conclusions.</p>

 

<p>What's the limitation or problem of your current equipment? Will that be solved with a D4 or D800. And what about a backup system if you choose the D4? </p>

<p>What's in the EXIF info or in other apps? </p>

<p>I switched from Photoshop (I think CS4 was the latest version I used) to Aperture. Initially only for asset management, but after I got used to it, Aperture can do (almost) everything you need to do as a photographer. If you can't get a proper image out of Aperture it's better to go back to your camera and start all over again... Having said that, Photoshop is of course a great tool if you need more than simply optimizing your images. </p>

<p>If built quality is a concern with the kit lensen, just buy 2 or 3 of them. 3 Nikkor 18-55's are cheaper than 1 better lens ;-)</p>

<p>When shooting auto with a Nikon I prefer to use P + center weighted metering. Matrix was nice for film, but I don't really see the added value for digital. Center weighted metering is much more predictable. Moving one meter to the left or right impacts matrix metering in almost all situations, but it doesn't with center weighted metering. So the output will be much more consistent and requires less post-processing to balance the exposure mistakes due to matrix metering. </p>

 

<p>Did your camera overexpose or the the exposure correct?<br>

Cleaning the sensor cannot be the reason since light is measured somewhere else in the camera. </p>

@JDM: nothing wrong with the fact that the ad agency used Macs. When you are looking for an ad agency you select

them on advertising competence, not on the tools they use.

 

It would have been something else if Microsoft employees need Macs to be able to do their day to day job. Or vice versa.

<p>Done.</p>

Nice guide. But I doubt if it includes anything new for potential D800 buyers/users....

<p>No, I don't have this dilemma. The D7000 looks like a fine camera to me. You can wait until the next big thing, but remember that the camera is only a tool. </p>

<p>What's the problem with your D50?</p>

<p>Start with using integral metering. Matrix metering is totally unpredictable. If you take several pictures of the same subject and while moving around a bright or dark object moves to another segment in the matrix metering, the overall measurement will be different. This is less of an issue with integral metering. When you really want to do it properly, use spot metering and manual settings. </p>

<p>Upgrading? Preparing for the D90 successor? </p>