larry_walker1

I seen many people (myself included) get "blurry pictures" with digital P&S cameras due to the shutter lag they have. People are accustomed to shooting with film cameras, where they can press the shutter release and immediately drop the camera from their eye.

With digital P&S cameras, I tell people to press the shutter release and then count to 2 (One, Two) before moving the camera. Works wonders for my photos before I moved up to a DSLR...

Larry

But if I recall the info on the Kenko website correctly, the PRO teleconverters are recommended/required only for lenses f2.8 or faster.

Based on that advice I decided to save money and buy the non-PRO version to use with my Nikkor 300/f4 (non-AFS) lens. Shooting test targets and some random scenes (shooting slides, on a tripod, with cable release, moving in/out to achieve equivalent crops, examining slides with a 10x loupe) I was not able to convince myself I was seeing any significant degradation in either contrast or sharpness.

Given how relatively infrequently I need the extra reach, saving the $100+ and getting miniscule image degradation seemed like a very reasonable tradeoff...

Larry

gregg johnson wrote:

"If I'm not mistaken, the D70 manual states that when shooting in NEF + Basic, 2 images are created, so the 75 images that you are seeing should not surprise you"

Sorry, I should have been clearer: I was able to store 75 photos, amounting to twice that many files (a RAW and a JPG-Basic of each)...

Larry

Well, it certainly makes sense that it has to do some amount of guessing as to the size that a compressed RAW file will end up being.

But I've yet to see the D70 generate a RAW file that's anything but 5.7MB and yet it seems to be assuming that each RAW file will end up at around 11MB (512MB / 46 images). So it seems to be guessing based on a very-unlikely case for the compressed RAW size (or just using the uncompressed RAW size?)...

Larry

I just received my D70 yesterday, and have noticed an oddity in the

exposure counter. When I insert a 512MB CF card and select

RAW+Basic, it reads 46 exposures available. When I read the card on

the computer, it shows that each RAW file is 5.7MB and each Basic

JPG is 786KB.

So by my math, each card should hold approx. 512/6.5 = 78 images.

And sure enough, if I click off a bunch of exposures, until the LCD

displays "Full", then open the card on the computer, I have 75

images!

Closer examination show that as each image is written, the exposure

counter initially decrements, then after a second or so it

increments back up (every other time, or so). Thus I can take about

75 shots, with the exposure counter only ticking down by one on

every other shot...

This doesn't seem to cause any problems, other than confusion. Is

anyone else seeing this?

Larry

Rob:

Can you elaborate on the "had mirror lock-up" remark?

Other reports have claimed the mirror lockup was only in a non-shooting mode, for cleaning the sensor. Did you find that there was a way to achieve mirror lockup when shooting, i.e. for those 1/2 to 1/15 second tripod exposures with my 300mm?

I'm sure you'll get all kinds of astute mathematical analyses as to how feasible this is or isn't. And a bunch of tips of how to up-res the files in .0001% increments to maximize quality.

But it's all a fool's-errand: any argument you make to your employer just makes you sound like a naysayer, like the boy-who-cries-wolf.

A much more useful response is to act interested and supportive, help them pick an image that's near-and-dear to the Executive VP in Charge of Doing PR On The Cheap, and send it out for a 16x20 print.

One of two outcomes: Either the EVPiCoDPROTC will think the print is perfectly fine (in which case you would have been wasting your breathe with technical arguments) or s/he will hate the print (in which case you can cluck sympathetically and shake your head at how the camera companies are ripping their customers off with those cheap 1.2 MP toys and then get a signed PO to go out and buy a really cool 8 MP prosumer model).

Either way, you come out looking better than you would if you'd just argued against doing it, and the company ends up getting prints that are good-enough to make them happy...

Sorry to sound jaded, but sometime I am!

Larry Walker

Gavin:

Can't answer for 100 rolls of 120, but I went to Cuba in 2001 with 30-odd rolls of 35mm. Customs didn't even look in my luggage, despite warnings in various travel books re strict limits on bringing film in. Others in my class said they had their bags looked at but still no hassle (for even larger amounts of 35mm film).

I arrived late, nearly midnight after snow delays leaving Toronto, and that seemed to reduce the attention we got. Others arriving at more "normal" hours got more attention. If you have a choice of flights, you might opt for late arrival.

Larry Walker

On Sunday 9/16, we flew from Portland,OR through Minneapolis to Madison, WI on Northwest. NW had signs posted at the check-in counter saying that they were enforcing a limit of one carry-on item (and not defining whether that allowed a purse/briefcase item in addition to the one "real" carry-on). They did not appear to be enforcing this much at all, though on the second flight they did stop someone with a wheeled carry-in, a piggie-back wheeled case and a back-pack. Not sure how many of these he had to gate-check.

Much to our surprise, they were still allowing the use of the e-check-in terminals ("Click here to say 'No, no one has given me anything to carry'"). There was an extra check right before the security/x-ray station, asking for your boarding pass and photo ID. They did not ask for ID again at the gate, despite reports that they would.

We saw only one bag get opened and searched at the security check-point. They were wanding only people who set off the metal detector, but that seemed to be set pretty sensitively.

I had put my tripod in a hard-sided checked bag, and carried a Mini-Trekker on board without any issue.

Overall, we were surprised at how little difference there was from the trip out (pre-9/11). Some obvious changes like no curbside check-ins (and barely even allowing curb-side drop-offs) and signs about no knife-like objects of any kind. Some not so obvious changes like waiting for the whole crew to arrive together at the gate and be vouched for by the captain, then gate personnel escorting the crew to the plane as a group. But mostly the individual passenger didn't experience much difference or much delay, at that airport anyway. We had a feeling we were lucky to be traveling from a minor market, and suspected that the experience was likely to be much different at LAX, LGA or ORD...

Larry

Just drop the numeric rating system entirely!

1) The last few weeks have clearly shown it is infinitely prone to abuse, spoofing and hacking. And it has created large amounts of ill-will within the photo.net coummunity. It was a nice idea, you tried it, it blew up in your face.

2) Comments are a preferred way of giving feedback on peoples' artwork. There is an inherent silliness in assigning quantitative ratings to artistic expression.

Larry