h_m5

<p>I use CNX2 exclusively for my NEF files..that's what it's designed for and it applies your in-camera settings to your NEF (RAW) file..unlike the other RAW software (ACR, LR, etc.) CNX2 knows how to read your NEF file and doesn't need to "estimate" compared to ACR or etc. </p>

<p>I sold my D90 with 9K actuations for $600..to give you an idea..yes, I'd saythere is room to negotiate here..</p>

<p>By Nikon Software you mean ViewNX? Are you familiar with ACR or NEF? What do use to deal with your NEF files? </p>

<p>that's good to hear..sounds like a winner.</p>

<p>I'm considering getting CEFX along with CNX2..does anyone here that also use CEFX comment on what you like/dislike about CEFX. Is it worth it?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Was your rock image shot wide open? Also what is your focal length and shutter speed? are you using a tripod? looks like it could be miotion blur.. If your hand held at 200mm your shutter should be AT LEAST 1/200 if not faster. </p>

<p>I have used PhotoBucket to show them to my family. You can either have the album open or password protected. It does the "free" job.</p>

<p>I also bought a expensive lens from Ebay and when I received it it had lens fungus within the elements. I pointed this out. The seller was hesitant at first, and didn't know what lens fungus was/is, but as we BOTH had excellent ratings I think neither of us wanted a negative rating.<br>

In the end you have to do what is right and say to yourself.."What if it was me?" ..and that's you answer.</p>

<p>My volume is about 80 GB right now. Also, the idea of having a few albums available sound good too..hmm..maybe do both now thinking about it... I had a SeaGate 160GB FreeAgent Go..which broke down on me..just considering if the next HD will go kaput..</p>

<p>I'm contemplating either getting a external HD to back-up OR subscribing to SmugMug. I guess the downside is that I have to pay a yearly fee, but then again the responsibility of the photos would be on them, and then I don't have to worry about my own personal back-up HD breaking down either.<br>

What do you guys think?</p>

<p>Sorry Rainer, yes, that's what I meant from 50mm perspective.<br>

Wow, those were perfect explanations. I didn't know that zoom can affect IQ but then again it makes sense right, the less moving parts the better. Good stuff, thank you.</p>

<p>I realize that the f/1.4 is going to much better/faster in lower light BUT if someone can answer me this:<br>

Let's say we take a picture, with all lighting and environmental elements being the same, @ 35mm, f/2.8, for both lenses and how about at 50mm Is the image quality going to be the same? <br>

The point I'm trying to make is will the 17-55 produce equal results as the 50 as long as focal distance and aperture remain the same? </p>

<p>I hate to dig up an old thread but I was also comparing these two together prior to my purchase of the 17-55..and the way I see it is that the 17-55 is the "24-70" for the DX body as with the 1.5 crop factor it make it a 25.5-82.5 (24-70). <br>

I know we want the 24-70 but your DX is made for the 17-55, hence the DX on the lens. Also the range can't be beat, whereas with the 36-105, I mean 24-70 ^__^, I think you lose some of the creativity you would've had with the 17-55. Buy the shoe that fits I say. It's a bitchin' lens, nothing to worry about.</p>

<p>Yes, it's only on that black ring surface. Sorry the picture was taken with the wife's P&S on macro to show this.<br>

I went to a local camera shop here in LA, Samy's. I checked out even their demo and rental 17-55 DX's and there was NO sign of this on theirs. I've sent it back to B&H for a replacement as I bought it new from them. Just something to look out for.</p>

<p>Josh, what do you think it is? Is it a loose or part of the coating? I'm tempted to send it back but if don't want to if it's "normal"..</p>

<p>yeah, maybe I'm making a mountain out of a molehill. It just has this crystallized looking surface on this black ring..like when you look at some graphite. </p>

<p>You have to go to a bright light..or take a flash photo..</p>

<p>I've been using Aperture Priority and utilizing the focal range and f-stops, but have noticed that my shutter speed is not fast enough at times and sometimes get blurry photos. <br>

If I shoot in Shutter Priority, I'll have both the right shutter speed BUT then would I lose control of the DOF? I assume the camera would compensate which aperature is "best", but does then does it adjust for a small DOF or great one?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I got mine last week from B&H, new, and as Joerg said I have no problem either. I too would'nt have tested for this either. Maybe it was an older problem but I tested it also at AF-C for 30 secs and the sound is the same quiet sound and same responsiveness. </p>

<p>I just received this lens (purchased brand new from B&H) and was giving it a close examination. I noticed that on the inner, black velvety-colored ring there are minute glass or metallic like speckles/flecks on it. The pictures are great but still would like to know if other 17-55 DX owners have also seen this on theirs. I can only see it when the light hits it at a certain angle however.<br>

Here's are a couple of pictures of what I mean:<br>

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v67/mizuno9/008-3.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v67/mizuno9/005-2.jpg" alt="" /><br>

The lens itself is obviously immaculate..but it's the stuff on the inside on top of the velvety black ring that you see here. It really stands out as I used a flash, but normal lighting you have to slant it at the right angle to see it. As you can kinda see in the 2nd pic it is reflecting various colors..?</p>