itai

<p>For historical reasons, the D7000 is not the camera I use for sports, but if I had to choose on TODAY, that is the one I'd get. Its performance is superb and most importantly autofocus is very fast. It locks and tracks moving subject quickly which is key for sports photography. I reviewed it here a few months ago: <a href="http://www.neocamera.com/camera/nikon/d7000/review">http://www.neocamera.com/camera/nikon/d7000/review</a><br>

As for the D700, it is a great camera too. What bugs me the most about it is the lack of the 100% coverage viewfinder, it simply drives me crazy! On the other hand, if you were to specialize in INDOOR sports, the D700 has the performance advantage when combining action and low-light due to its larger pixels.<br>

You will notice that specification-wise the newer D7000 leads the D700 in most respects, it even shoots a bit faster continuously: <a href="http://www.neocamera.com/camera_compare.php?model[]=11&model[]=243&compare=">http://www.neocamera.com/camera_compare.php?model[]=11&model[]=243&compare=</a><br>

Good luck with your next purchase!</p>

<p>I've been to most of those countries, sometimes with a backpack, sometimes with a suitcase. I've also been to over 40 other countries, so I experienced all range of conditions and threats.<br>

The guidebooks seem to go particularly strong on the warnings for crimes, mostly erring on the side of caution which is not a bad thing. When I went to Guatemala for example, everyone said how dangerous Guatemala City was and there was nothing to see there and you had to get out as fast as possible. I ignored them and get many interesting photos before moving on. Here is my gallery of 2 weeks in Guatemala:<br>

<a href="http://www.neoluminance.com/query.php?gallery=Guatemala">http://www.neoluminance.com/query.php?gallery=Guatemala</a><br>

How did I do it? The same as everywhere else: Stay aware, stay alert. Avoid empty places and very crowded ones. There is no way to conceal my gear, its too big, so I do not even try. If there is police around, you are usually safe. In Guatemala you can even ask the tourist police to accompany you to reach places where you would otherwise be alone.<br>

This did not happen to me in Central America but there are times where it best to leave your gear in the hotel room if you want to visit something very interesting in a rough place. In the Philippines in for example, I brought a disposable camera to some parts of Manila. The city of Colon in Panama would require the same caution.<br>

Goog luck, have fun and stay safe!<br>

- Itai</p>

<p>Rafael: You know laptops can work with external displays? With a docking station, a number of Thinkpads can drive 30" displays, otherwise you are limited to 27".<br>

There is also a dual-screen version of the W700, the W701DS, it has a main 17" display which is the same resolution as most 22 to 27" screens (1920x1200) and a second 10", 1280x800, display. Both are led backlit. The built-in Xrite calibrator calibrates the 17" display.<br>

So, yes there is a way to work with a laptop if you really want. Of course it would cost much less to have the same power in a desktop unit with more room for expansion and a more advanced RAID.<br>

- Itai</p>

<p>Well that usually depends on how much the laptop is lugged around... If it is for doing actual photo work, then you MUST either attach it to a color-correct external display to perform any kind of color changes OR you should get a Lenovo W700. It is a large17" laptop but has the most accurate display of any laptop (although it does not come close to what you can get in an LCD for about $480). The W700 also has an Xrite color-calibrator built-in and a pressure sensitive Wacom tablet which are used for performing corrections and photo-manipulations which I understand wedding photographers do regularly.<br>

For someone who does not manipulate his images, then the display issue is only important if he wants to showcase his images on the laptop. If the laptop won't be used for manipulation or display of images, then you can go for something more portable which is basically a laptop used by a photographer rather than a laptop for a photographer. In the former case, any with a big hard-drive and a burner should do.<br>

- Itai</p>

<p>OK, Mark. In that case the 2 Sigma option still applies but could could get the Nikkor 17-55mm F2.8 if you want better image quality and one stop more light at the long end at the expense of macro capability.<br>

I'd still go with the Sigma 100-300mm F4 for the long end since it is really sharp and Nikon does not have a comparable offering. You would probably find their 80-200mm F2.8 too short for wildlife and the longer ones will either cost you an arm or at least one stop of light.</p>

<p>Honestly, I would opt for less range but higher quality. Even if some photos you can't get, it is not like you are going to run out of photos to take. You did not say what system you are using, so the exact lenses vary but we do know you are using a cropped sensor :)<br>

For Pentax for example, you can get the DA* 16-50mm F2.8 and the DA* 60-250mm F4. Since you are emphasizing the game park, you may want to try a less conventional combination like a Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 Macro which is a medium quality lens but includes macro capability and a Sigma 100-300mm F4 which is a truly awesome lens. This will get you to a relatively bright aperture at the long end which will help greatly over the F6.3 that super-zooms give you need that range, specially that animals tend to be most active in early morning or late evening.<br>

- Itai</p>

<p>One thing that is extremely important to know is that DOF depends on viewing size. So even if you use the DOF-preview you still wont know what depth-of-field will be when you print or display your image on a large screen. A DOF-preview in live-view mode is therefore more representative because the LCD is larger than the viewfinder and therefore closer to what one would actually print.<br>

- Itai</p>

<p>William,<br>

OK, so the system I proposed only has 8 GB of RAM compared to the $2K HP.... but not only did I pay $1K, you can save about $200 by not putting in the Blu-Ray burner. If you want you can either keep the difference or invest it into another 8GB.<br>

With regards to other specs, the system I built still has more processor power and a 1TB RAID-0 for images and a separate 1TB disk for the OS and applications which will cut in half the time it takes to load images. Yes, for less than $1K. Here is the blog post which had the exact configuration: http://blog.neocamera.com/?p=562<br>

I use that system every day and I am truly happy with its performance. I've never seen it even close to 100% resource usage, so it should be good for a while.<br>

- Itai</p>

<p>Really, the problem with laptops is that even the best ones still have mediocre color-reproduction which makes it very hard to do anything with colors accurately. If you want to go that route, then you can obviously get a laptop and a separate monitor but that may leave too little budget for a laptop. Also, unless you get an expensive laptop your disks are going to be slower than with a desktop, that is quite a penalty with Lightroom as it access the disk very often.<br>

As for a desktop, a few months ago I built a new and very powerful machine and it cost me just around $1000 USD. This is truly a high-performance machine for photography. I published an article which documents all the parts and decisions:<br>

<a href="http://www.neocamera.com/feature_photography_computer.html">http://www.neocamera.com/feature_photography_computer.html</a><br>

One or two parts may have slightly changed since then but all the advice and consideration are still valid.<br>

- Itai</p>

<p>Pentax K-7 with DA* 16-50mm F2.8 mounted.<br>

DA 12-24mm F4, DA 55mm F1.4, DA 35mm F2.8, Macro Limited and DA* 60-250mm F4.<br>

Depending on the shoot, I more often take the DA* 50-135mm F2.8 (more people) instead of the 60-250mm (more wildlife). Carry both would mean more visits to the chiropractor ;)<br>

Sometimes use the FA 31mm F1.8 instead of the 55mm for something wider if do not expect to need the extra stop and it is not raining.<br>

77mm filters: Hoya Polarizer HD, Hoya ND8, Hoya ND400, UV (for imminent danger only: salt-water, flying sand, etc). Step up rings to 77mm for all zooms with different thread size.<br>

Remote-trigger, 3 batteries, Gary Fong Puffer, 4 x 2GB memory cards, memory wallet. Lens pens, two micro-fiber cloths (one for the lens one for the viewfinder/LCD), lens tissue, lens cleaning fluid. Extra quick-release plate.<br>

...Now that I wrote all this, I did not realize my Lowepro Nova 5 could carry that much!</p>

<p>David,<br>

As someone said, familiarity is important. If you are going to make the switch though because of the conveniences (no film, development, instant results, etc), you need to consider a few factors:<br>

- If you are expecting film like quality or shallow depth of field, go with a digital camera that can give you something close. At this point ANY DSLR from ANY brand will do, you could also get a Micro-4/3 camera like the Olympus E-P2/E-P1.<br>

- If you do not mind less quality, most notably above the base ISO, then a compact will do. If you use manual controls then the Canon Powershot S90 is probably your best bet. It is very efficient to use, effectively having two control dials and shares the same sensor as the G11 but adds in an F/2 lens which compensates for the performance of one stop of ISO. Unless you really want the hot-shoe, then there is no reason to get a Canon G-series anymore, and even so a Micro-4/3 camera is not much bigger.<br>

- If you shoot mostly on automatic and want something compact, the very best image quality comes from the Fuji Finepix F200EXR which has excellent dynamic range and a wide-angle lens. It actually does have manual controls, which are slow to use but at least they are there just in case.<br>

Personally, I own a F200EXR which we always leave on a table or counter at home to get some quick shots of the kids without getting the big guns out. It is really an outstanding device. I also had a S90 for testing and I really loved the controls and their efficiency. If I were to use a compact camera as a backup for photography (not snapshots), I would pick the S90. The decision comes from how you use your camera.<br>

- Itai</p>

<p>I'll second the camera bag plus backpack approach. That is pretty much ideal because during the day you only need the camera and maybe a few items you can slip in the camera bag (map, sunscreen, etc). Most backpacking bags are too big to not check in anyways, so you can use the camera bag as carry on or personal item.<br>

I use a backback that has a detachable daypack which I use as a carry-on just to have an extra set of clothes and documents on the plane in case the backpack gets delayed. So on the plane I have the detachable daypack PLUS the camera bag (Lowepro Nova 5 for a big load or my favorite, the Rezo 190, for a small load).<br>

- Itai<br>

<b>Signature URL removed. Not allowed per photo.net Terms of Use.</b></p>

<p>Well said Kevin. I know you got a lot of varried responses but the great thing is that you made a choiced based on your needs, the lenses you use, the ISO range you use, etc.<br>

All the "but Canon has more lenses" responses do not matter if the lenses you need are available with your new camera.<br>

I don't own a Sony but their A900 tempts me a lot since it is the smallest full-frame DSLR with a 100% viewfinder. Now that I have a 100% viewfinder on a cropped camera, I can't live without it. Plus, I'm fully equipped for Sony with a full range of Minolta (all FF) lenses, I just need the price to come down a bit...<br>

Now go have fun!<br>

- Itai<br>

www.neovoyage.com</p>

<p>There is a <a href="http://www.neocamera.com/review_fuji_f100_more.html">review of the F100fd</a> already. The bottom line is that image quality is excellent (better than the F50 by a bit), the wide angle lens is also very good (sharp and quite useful) but Fuji's been fudging on the interface (accessing EC and WB is painfully slow).</p>

<p>Indeed it would be great if they updated the E900 to the F100's sensor which would give us manual controls, better ergonomics and AA batteries. I'm with you on this one, they can do it now because I got the F100 ;)</p>

That is correct, the S9000 has a much smaller sensor. But what matters is the actual image quality. We know that larger sensors means less image noise but a big part of image quality has to do with the lens and image interpolation. Here you can see how the S9000 measures up to the 20D:

http://www.neocamera.com/review_fuji_s9000_crops3.html

- Itai

That is an interesting dilema, if you are interested in similar quality differences, you can see how the S9000 compares to the 20D here:

http://www.neocamera.com/review_fuji_s9000_crops3.html

The full-review also talks a lot about ergonimics which is an important

part of using a camera. See:

http://www.neocamera.com/review_fuji_s9000_more.html

- Itai