stevea

The Tiger lily was taken with the D2x and 105mm f/2.8 AF micro.

 

f/5.6 1/45sec spot meter

In the back yard. Tiger lillies came out this week.

 

Steve<div></div>

It's like fine wine vs cheaper wine. If you can't taste the difference, don't buy the good stuff. The 17-55mm is a pro lens, the 18-35mm will give you good snap shots. If you can tell the difference between a good snap shot and a pro shot and it bothers you not having the best, then buy the 17-55mm; otherwise save your money.

 

Edward stated most of the detail differences except the obvious difference in the speed of the lens.

I have tried the Hoodman, but found it covered the screw for the rangefinder cover. Since I use the right angle viewer a fair amount of time, I returned it. I agree that the construction is not up to Nikon satandards. I leave the lcd cover on while shooting. It does create difficulty in seeing the results clearly, but a scratched lcd is a far worse result. Since I wear eyeglasses, scratring the lcd while shootis is a very real possibility.

 

I too, would be interested in a good solution. Maybe Nikon will solve it with the D3x.

Here's another vote for Proshow Gold. It is resource intensive - which I suspect is the issue with those that have commented about problems. I have had no trouble creating slide shows with background music, synchronizing the slides with the music and varying the transitions between slides. I have output to cd for playing on another computer, dvd for playing on a DVD player and to a file for playing on my computer.

 

There is a "Pro" version which costs about $300, which you might want to consider.

If you get the 2.8, you'll never be wishing for it. Buy the best and spend the time you would have spent on shopping, doing the thing you love - shooting.

 

Steve

I seem to recall they are around $100. Canon i series printers are very finicky about using cheap inks. I learned my lesson, having to replace a print head several years ago. I always use Canon inks now. I find the results are better and no trouble with clogs or most anything else.

 

The comment about one a week use is well taken. You would be able to get away with not using the printer for a couple of weeks occasionally, but do it too often and you're asking for trouble.

 

Steve

I'm not familiar with version 6.0, but you should be able to make a border by changing the canvas size by one half inch in each dimension and filling it with black.

Thanks for your good responses.

 

Just to be clear, I'm summarizing the responses to mean that there is no easy way to test the meter against the camera's meter because too many variables come into play.

 

The inclusion of the mirror lock-up - Actually, the camera was in lock-up mode when I took the first shot, so I continued it for the second.

I just realized that the picture taken using the metered settings was shot at ISO 100 instead of ISO 640. Sorry. When I shot it with the right settings is howed slightly brighter (as would be expected for a longer exposure - all other things being equal). This brings up another question - is 1/30 vs 1/40 a significant difference? If so, is there a way to calibrate the meter?

 

Steve Abramson<div></div>

I have owned the Sekonic L308S for about a year and never got around to using

it. After reading the manual and using a fresh battery, I turned it on, set it

to the ambient mode, stood where I wanted to take a picture (in my office),

pointed the meter at where the camera would be and pressed the switch to get a

reading. The reading was f2.0 @ 1/30sec ISO 640. I put my camera in Aperture

mode at f2.0, ISO 640 and it took the picture at 1/40sec. The picture taken

seemed properly exposed. I then took the same picture with the camera set at

the metered reading and as expected, it looked moderately underexposed.

 

Is this a good test to see if the meter is working? Are there other factors to

consider? The camera is the Nikon D2x with the 50mm f1.8 lens attached. Both

shots were hand held using mirror lockup.

 

Steve Abramson<div></div>

Arnab:

 

Thanks for your response. When you sold the lens, did you do it because of the rattle or were you buying the VR version?

Walter:

I must get 50 jokes a day in the email. Yours is the best of the year!

 

Thanks for the laugh.

I noticed that if I shake this lens, I hear a rattle coming from inside the

lens. It seems to be working OK, but I've had it less than a year. Is this normal?

With the 17-55 f2.8 DX, the 70-200 f2.8 VR and the 200-400 f4 VR, I'd weld them all together rather than get rid of any of them.

Go for Elements 4. It is a subset of Photoshop and will get you started in the right direction. When you can afford it, get Photoshop. You'll never look back.

Thanks. I'm going there in Early June. I hope the babies don't stray too far from the nest by then!

I guess I'll bring my 200-400 f/4 VR and the 70-200 f/2.8 VR. I have a wheeled carry-on which nicely fits both along with straps for my tripod.

 

Thanks.

Great Shot. What did you use? What settings?

 

I'm going to Southern Florida in a few weeks and plan to visit Corkscrew. Any advice?

I would send it through the cleaning process a few times. I sometimes get the same type of problems with my Canon i9900 if I let it rest for a week or more. Cleaning a few times, gets the gunk out.

Eric:

 

Sorry I didn't see your post sooner or I would have given you the same instruction you wound up with. It's nice to know where to go for this and more information than you would ever want to know about the camera and the shot you took.

Thanks to you all. I found the PS CS2 info with instruction from a friendly Nikonian and now I have more ways of doing the same thing. The photo community is a great resource for the uninformed.

"Number of Shutter Actuations on D2x"

 

Is there an easy way to find out how many clicks the D2x has? I

read that you can find this information in Photoshop CS2, but I looked

in the file info area and couldn't find it.

 

I called Nikon and they said they could tell me if I brought the

camera in. Is there an easier way to do this?

Try Pro Show Gold from Photodex

Thanks to all for your responses. It sounds like the thing to do is put the 200-400 on my existing equipment and see if it works well. If not, go to a sturdier rig - ballhead first (Kirk BH1 or Arca-Swiss B1)- if that doesn't solve it, legs (Gitzo 1325).