ptkeam

So . . . has anyone successfully done slide duplicating with Olympus Micro 4/3, Olympus MF 50mm 3.5 macro and Nikon es-1 slide copying adapter???

Yes, I thought I was going to have to use contact cement, but fortunately I didn't have to

So, I have a Lumix 14-140mm lens which I love as a do-everything, walk-around lens. Unfortunately the rubber grip on the zoom ring was slipping -- I read some forum suggestions here and there -- one suggestion was to soak the grip in gasoline over night (yeah, right).

I contacted Panasonic service about this and was told it would cost $75. just for them to LOOK at the lens. PLUS whatever the repair charge would be. THANKS but NO THANKS.

So I just slid the grip off and noticed that there seemed to be an accumulation of oils, gunk etc. on the zoom ring and the underside of the grip. I just cleaned both off with alcohol and slipped the grip back on. PROBLEM SOLVED.

<p>Hi,<br>

I'm currently shooting with an em5 and a Pen epl5. I recently picked up a 43 system 14-54mm 2.8-3.5 lens which I love. Built like a tank and superb optical quality. <br>

However, as I'm sure you folks know -- there's an aggravating delay in auto focus. I know that the em1 will focus "up to speed" with the E system lenses. -- I'd like to know though just how fast this focus speed actually is. Does the em1 focus with 43 lenses as fast as with micro 43 lenses.<br>

I'm going to keep the 14-54mm lens but I'm thinking about getting a used em1 body for the enhanced autofocus performance.<br>

Would this be worth the expenditure???<br>

Thanks<br>

PTK</p>

<p>Hi,<br>

So I'm using an OMD EM5 body to shoot video. I'd like to have a second body for a backup and also to have a second camera recording on a tripod so I can edit in shots from both cameras. <br>

The specs. of the video from the epl-3 look pretty similar. I'm wondering of these two different bodies would produce files that would mesh well in an edited final product.<br>

Thanks</p>

 

<p>Hi All,<br>

Just picked up a mint-condition Canon iP6700D printer @ Goodwill for $5. Works perfectly and even has original Canon inkjet cartridges loaded.<br>

So I've used Epson photo printers for years and have become familiar with clogging inkjets and the little sponge at the bottom of the printer that collects the waste ink. I purchased a small plastic tube and waste bottle to divert the ink from the sponge so it doesn't soak up ink & get saturated -- essentially killing your printer.<br>

My question is this : is there a similar issue with Canon printers???? Specifically the iP6700D??? Are there other issues I should know about??? So far I'm very happy with the printer.<br />Thanks</p>

<p>Well, what I was REALLY trying to get at originally is: Why do most people get rid of their existing cameras????? I suspect that it really isn't because their current gear "takes bad pictures". The vast majority of pictures I see on this website could easily have been taken with a D70 -- or a D40, D50, D100 or OF COURSE they could have been produced with a $6,000 D4. I would guess that most of the contributors on this website are not "true" professional photographers -- by that I mean that they earn 100% of their income from photography. <br>

I did earn 100% of my income as a professional photographer for over 25 years. When you are operating a business you upgrade your gear because you have a real need to do so. <br>

Although my heart races when I see a the latest Nikon DSLR I haven't parted with over $1,000 for a new body since getting my D70 because when I really thought about it I could still do what I set out to accomplish without a new body. I've spent money on lenses instead. <br>

So that being said. . . Walt Flanagan, I'll happily take your d200 off you hands. </p>

 

<p>So I've got two Nikon D70 bodies which I bought new I guess in 2005 or thereabouts. I've loved 'em since the moment I opened the boxes. <br>

Anyhow, I've managed to pick up a few sweet Nikkor manual focus lenses along the way -- 135mmQ 2.8, 50mmAI 1.4 and a couple others. I've been using a Sekonic L-308s meter since the oldies but goodies don't meter with my D70 bodies. <br>

I was thinking the other day about picking up a D200 body so I'd be able to meter manually and shoot in aperture priority with my MF Nikkors. D200's are REALLY reasonably priced these days. <br>

Then I wondered how much I could get for one of my D70's on THAT auction site. Jeepers creepers!!! D70's are going for $100 and UNDER. I just saw one that sold for $56. in perfect working condition. <br>

It's absolutely CRAZY that such a fine camera has been cast upon the junk pile by people afflicted with Nikon Acquisition Syndrome. <br>

Six megapixels is really PLENTY for MOST of the stuff that MOST people do. I've made many gorgeous 16x20's from my D70's. Yeah, I know, I know . . . the viewfinder is supposed to be horrible and it's got that teeny weeny LCD display. But hey, the battery holds a charge for EVER and it's really nice to synch. with a strobe @ 1/500. <br>

So any how, I'll probably go ahead and pick up a D200 but no way am I parting with one of my D70's for $56. <br>

I'm just sayin'.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hello,<br>

I have been using Photoshop elements 4.0 with my Nikon D70 and Canon G5 for several years. I shoot mostly raw with both cameras. <br>

I recently replaced the G5 with a Canon G11 and Elements 4.0 wouldn't open the raw files. I bought a used copy of elements 7.0 because I had read that this would accommodate the G11's raw files. <br>

However -- right out of the box it wouldn't open the G11 raw files. I went to the adobe website and downloaded the camera raw update that was supposed to work with the G11 files but it still won't open them. <br>

I can use the Canon software that came with the G11, but I'd much rather use Elements to open, organize and edit raw files from both my Nikon and Canon cameras. <br>

Any insight would be much appreciated.<br>

Thanks</p>

 

<p>I'd strongly suggest you look at a 28mm f2.8 prime lens. This is the equivalent of a 42mm lens on a 35mm camera -- so you'll have a little wider field of view than the 35mm (and it'll be cheaper) plus you'll still have a fast 2.8 aperture. <br>

The problem with the 18-55 or other zoom is the small max aperture -- especially as soon as you start to zoom in from the 18mm focal length. </p>

<p>Hello,<br>

I've just gotten a Canon g11 -- can't open the raw files in Photoshop Elements 4.0. I've used it successfully with my old Canon G5, but the newer raw files in the G11 don't work.<br>

I've updated the raw converter to ver. 3.7 which is the newest one useable with Elements 4.0 and still doesn't work.<br>

My question is: What is the earliest version of PS elements that will open the raw files from a Canon G11?? I'm cheap and I really don't want to spring for a brand new copy of PS Elements 10.0 or whatever the newest one is. I'd really rather find a used, earlier version that will work.<br>

Thanks</p>

<p>Radford,<br>

Thanks so much for you response. This is what I suspected -- logic seemed to dictate that the effective magnification would be greater -- but I wasn't sure. </p>

<p>Hi.<br>

I use a Nikon 28-105mm "macro" zoom lens on my D70. (GREAT results -- I LOVE this lens). Anyhow, I'm wondering what effective magnification I am getting on a DX sensor. The lens focuses to 1:2 reproduction ratio on 35mm film @the 105mm setting but I'm wondering if I'm actually getting 50% "closer" in effect on the DX sensor because of the crop factor. <br>

Optics geeks please advise.<br>

Thanks</p>

 

<p>Another vote for a Nikkormat. A fabulous camera that never got the respect that it deserved. I made my living with one during the '70s. <br /> Now I love my equally humble D70. I bought two of them new and and I'm still delighted with them. Megapixels are over-rated.</p>

<p>Just like you I use a D70. (I have two that I bought new and have no desire to "upgrade"). I have an 18-55 nikon dx lens which I'm really pleased with. 52mm filter size is great. It's small, light and performs way above its price. <br>

It does have limitations (mostly slow max apeture @55mm) but if you recognize them you'll have great results.</p>

<p>Hello Photo.net community,<br>

I have two D70's that I bought new, use a lot and still love. To day I encountered something I've not seen before. While out shooting and pausing to review using camera's playback, I had a couple of shots that displayed the following message instead of the picture preview:<br>

"No image data in file". <br>

This happened, maybe, three times out of 50 or so pictures I took. I'm thinking that maybe that the shutter just malfunctioned -- ie. didn't open & close at all -- and so nothing was recorded on the sensor. <br>

Any input??? Thanks</p>

<p>I too am still using my two D70 bodies. I bought them new in '04 & '05 and have been VERY happy with them. If you use good picture taking techniques and have good lenses you'll get great results out of a D70. <br>

I've produced many beautiful 16x20's with my D70's. It would be cool to have a D90 or the new D7000 but why would I really want to drop $1000 or more for a new body??? I would ALSO have to get a new computer with a REALLY big hard drive (and more backup capacity) just to handle 12mp + raw files. <br>

It's also REALLY nice to synch with flash @ 1/500 sec. <br>

One nice thing about being a decade into the digital revolution is that there are LOTS of great used camera bodies out there now.<br>

As an earlier poster mentioned, each time a new Nikon body is introduced it makes used stuff that much cheaper. <br>

We do owe a debt to those afflicted with N.A.S. THANKS</p>

<p>I have the 28-105 3.5/4.5 which I use on a D70. It is a great focal length range for portraiture and is really sharp. I have used it extensively for portraits and have been pleased. I highly recommend it.</p>

<p>Geez, I'm totally happy STILL with my (gulp) two D70 bodies. I'd kind of like to have more megapixels, but even that wouldn't be an absolute must. I've gotten gorgeous results 16x20 and below with my 6mp D70. And let's be honest, how many people habitually print larger than that on a regular basis. <br>

Lower noise @ high ISO's would be nice, but then Noise Ninja does a pretty fantastic job for me. <br>

When it gets right down to it nothing has come along that makes me feel I ABSOLUTELY have to plunk down a thousand bucks OR MORE for a new body. (Nothing else out there by the way syncs @ 1/500 sec. with flash) <br>

I have assembled a collection of good lenses and I use good technique while shooting -- exposure, focus, camera handling, lens choice, good in-camera composition to minimize cropping.<br>

I'm a happy camper (with a thicker wallet)</p>

<p>When clearing a compact flash card of images is it better to use the in-camera menu to delete all or to format the card?<br>

Does it even make a difference??</p>

<p>I'm a Nikon guy & have been for decades. HOWEVER, I would question the need for you to switch to Nikon at all. The Canon 5D is a fabulous camera. I had never taken a picture with a Canon camera 'til I picked up a Canon G5 used -- as a walk around P&S. I LOVE IT. Unless you're a sports, fashion, product photog. with very specific needs and with an urgent need for the most cutting edge technology there's NO reason to spend thousands of dollars to "upgrade". I use a couple of Nikon D70's that I am STILL very pleased with and I have no plans to "upgrade" my cameras (and "downgrade" my wallet) any time soon. Keep the 5D and what ever Canon lenses you have. Save money & have fun. :-)</p>

<p>I have two D70 bodies I've been using since they came out -- bought them new. I considered upgrading to a D80, but not really a HUGE jump in image quality. <br>

I would like to have a used D90, but I'm in no big hurry. Will wait 'til D90 is replaced and then pick up a used one. <br>

For now I'm STILL happy with my D70's. If you get another body, hang on to your D70s. You'll be glad you did.</p>

 

<p>Back "in the film days" I had an old 135mm f/2.8Q nikkor lens and LOVED IT. A couple of months ago I picked up one in MINT condition to use on my D70. I paid around $50. FABULOUS. I use a Sekonic hand-held meter with it. <br>

There are lots of gems like this out there. Another one is the 200mm f/4 Nikon lens. And, of course, the good old 50mm 1.8.</p>

<p>Has anyone used this scanner???? There were positive reviews about it on the B&H website. I'd love to do some scanning without breaking the bank.</p>

 

<p>I have two D70's that I purchased when they were new. I STILL use them and love them. I've made great 16x20's from them. I would like to maybe get a D90 some day -- only because of better high ISO performance. <br>

Otherwise, I'll keep using my trusty ANCIENT Nikons.</p>