chris_werner

<p>Alex,<br>

<br />We've got 4 MacBook Pros in my house - 2 15" and 2 13", split between Retina and not. I use a 15" MacBook Pro Retina, but would have gone for the 13" for its smaller size had it not been for one factor I don't see mentioned - the 15" versions have a dedicated video card, which I need for some programs and which can also improve performance. Whether you need that or not depends on your own situation.</p>

<p>Also, where the Retina displays are involved I too would recommend maxing the RAM out (remember, the higher res display will inherently demand more RAM), but budgets are a cruel reality, so I'll point out that if that is not in the budget, the Retina models all use SSDs, which make the swap files incredibly fast. So the give-up isn't really much in my experience.</p>

<p>Good luck with your decision!</p>

<p>Chris.</p>

 

<p>Gary,</p>

<p>I've got an X-Pro1 and am loving it. Good ergonomics, incredible IQ even at high ISOs, excellent out of camera JPGs that have me processing RAW only infrequently, great size - I could go on. I'm happier with this camera than I have been in years.</p>

<p>That being said, you will find it to be a radically different experience than your D700. The AF has not been an issue for me, not in the least, but it's going to be a big departure from the D700. Now to be clear, the issue is speed - once it locks it's very accurate. So you need to decide how much of an issue that would be for you based on your subject matter, shooting style, and temperament. For me, I don't even notice it, but it's driving some folks nuts, and those particularly with heavy DSLR backgrounds.</p>

<p>As with any camera there are some other niggles; indeed, there are enough minor quirks that it ends up giving the camera a certain charm if you are ok with them. Fuji did not aim here for a "me too" camera here, and that's in my opinion a large part of why the market is so polarized in its opinion of the camera. For me, it's a real winner - one I see being a real keeper. YMMV.</p>

<p>P.S. - A good group of users at http://www.fujix-forum.com/ who will readily admit the camera's shortcomings as well as its strengths.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Kryn mentioned both - X-Pro1 in the title, X100 in the post - which did you mean Kryn?</p>

<p>Dino - I'm not aware of any DSLR that goes for $450 or less, new that is. Take a look at <a href="http://www.keh.com">KEH</a> for some used options.</p>

<p>I think it needs the main app to work. Other wise you need to find at least one of the plist files.</p>

<p>Safari here. Chrome is Google, which means they're selling any info they get on you - a bit creepy for my taste.</p>

<p>You've got some stray plist files hanging around in the Library. You can try looking for them and deleting them manually, but there are several places they can show up in.</p>

<p>What's easier is to reinstall, then install a program like <a href="http://appzapper.com/">AppZapper</a>, then drag the app into AppZapper. It will find the related plist etc files and delete them.</p>

<p>If you want to do it manually, Application Support and Preferences are the first places to look in Library. You made need to check the Library under both your login name and Mac HD.</p>

<p>I love technology, but it doesn't have the same beauty as a classically engineered device for me. A lot of it is amazement for the fine functions that were built in the pre-digital age - kind of a "how did they manage that back then?" wonderment. A triumph of human ingenuity over brute force computer algorithms. </p>

<p>Other than that, it's a contrary mood - taking a break from high tech to go low tech just for the experience and enjoyment of it all.</p>

<p>There are only 2 reasons not to get the BH-55; more money, more weight. If you have the money, and you're confident the weight won't bother you, then get it and rest secure in the knowledge that you'll never be caught short and in need of another ball head. It's always best to make purchases like this only once! :)</p>

<p>I used to mount a 3.5 kilo 80mm telescope on a mount that would support over 30 kilos; it looked kind of silly, but you never regret too much stability.</p>

<p>Aah, my bad. Guess the full forum name is pretty unwieldy for the drop down menu. Never mind . . . :)</p>

 

<p>I just noticed that the Filter, Bags, Tripods and Accessories forum is not shown in the drop down menu of the forum tab. Yeah, it's a nit, but then I'm type A. :)</p>

<p>Just want to mention it in case you didn't know but do care.</p>

<p>We're old farts! :P</p>

<p>I do it because I enjoy the less automated process, I like the look of film, I admire the mechanics and engineering behind older cameras, with a bit of nostalgia thrown in, including my weird fondness of the smell of the chemicals.</p>

<p>But I shoot digital more because of convenience, low light capabilities, and the fact that I'm far better in the digital darkroom than I ever was in the analog one (you know, dodging and burning and the like - never really got very good at that).</p>

<p>So far I've used a Nikon DSLR with shortish lenses and small MF cameras (folders, TLRs). It can handle far more than that, I just haven't been using heavier equipment. And no, I haven't had the problem you describe.</p>

<p>This is only an opinion since I haven't done it, but I think the BH-40 will do well with a the 300mm lens you mentioned earlier. With a 2x converter I think you're going to need fast shutter speeds to keep the image sharp, but I don't think a bigger ball head will matter. It might help to hang some weight on the tripod to help dampen the vibrations.</p>

<p>I wouldn't say it that way - I would say that for a tripod of the same stability, basalt is between aluminum and CF in price and weight. I certainly haven't tested this out, but if you stay in the same series and with the same height and number of leg sections, I don't see there being any meaningful difference in stability.</p>

<p>And no, I don't know what model the GT3830 replaced.</p>

<p>Wow Mike! They not only like you, they apparently really know you as well. A very thoughtful gift. :)</p>

<p>The 3 series is mostly CF, but not all - look at the chart <a href="http://gitzo.com/cms/site/gitzo/cache/offonce/home/products/code_systems_and_charts/tripod_charts;jsessionid=56982AF2C820FA98FC0A5D69E9C46D44.worker1">here</a> which will show you the options. If you click on a link for any tripod, you can see the model coding on the right, near, but not at, the bottom.</p>

<p>If I remember correctly, the basalt is between CF and aluminum in both price and weight, so it really depends on your needs and budget. There is one basalt 3 series - the <a href="http://gitzo.com/cms/site/gitzo/tripods/basalt?code=GT3830">GT3830</a>.</p>

<p>If your wallet can handle it, get the very best for your needs - it's the kind of thing you want to do just once if you can. <a href="http://www.bythom.com/support.htm">Here</a> is a good article that describes the process most of us are guilty of.</p>

<p>The G1228 and the G1325 appear to be discontinued models, though you may have found someplace that still carries them. At some point subsequent to their introduction Gitzo rationalized its model naming system so that when you see GT1830 or GT1932 you can identify their features by the 4 digit code - 1st digit is series, 2nd is material, 3rd is leg sections, and 4th is the type of release.</p>

<p>So the GT1830 is a series 1, made of high performance basalt, with 3 legs sections and the type 0 release (not exactly sure what that denotes).</p>

<p>My GT3541LS is a series 3, made of carbon fiber, with 4 leg sections, and a type 1 release. The L indicates it's a long version, and the S means it's a Systematic.</p>

<p>So if you go with a current model Gitzo and want a Series 2, just look for GT2xxx and those will be your options. Personally with your gear, I would go with series 3 at a minimum.</p>

<p>Yeah, sturdy, light, cheap - pick any two.</p>

<p>Nir,</p>

<p>I haven't used any of those tripods, but I would be concerned that they're not going to be enough, esp. to deal with the sail effect you'll get from the 4x5's bellows in windy conditions. And even if you're not using a lot of bellows extension. Why the 1xxx series? Have you looked at the 2xxx?</p>

<p>Viktor,</p>

<p>I have no doubt that you've made an excellent choice.</p>

<p>Nikon t-mount $15 at <a href="http://www.adorama.com/LNTMNK.html">Adorama</a>.</p>

<p>It's not only made our point and clicks disappear, it's sent the small camcorder I got my wife to the yard sale pile. Our 2 daughters each play 4 instruments, so lots of performances and recitals and the camcorder never seemed to leave her desk. The only videos we've gotten recently have been taken with the iPhone. Hers was an older one so I popped for the iPhone 4 for her birthday. Bye bye camcorder.</p>

<p>I've done the same as Jeremiah - everything in folders by date, with numbers after. It's the best way I've found to track stuff down.</p>

<p>Inadvertant double post, sorry.</p>

<p>Tony,</p>

<p>The height represents the frequency or number of instances in the photo that are at that intensity. Let's say the photo was completely black; There would be a bar up above the 0 on the x axis, and nothing anywhere else on the histogram. If each light intensity from 0-255 were equally represented, you would have a flat line. If 2/3 of the scene were at one intensity and the other 1/3 at another single intensity you would have two lines, one twice as high as the other.</p>

<p>Here's an article that might help as well. <a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/understanding-histograms.shtml">Understanding Histograms</a></p>