jensen

The first thing to consider is whether the old lens is compatible with the new camera mount. In your case, I think you're ok. (I use Canon myself.)<br>

Secondly, the A100 features an APS-C-sized sensor, which means that the image from your old lens will be projected onto an area larger than the sensor. This is no problem per se, but the effect is that your lens' focal length will appear elongated. In fact, you'll see it increased by a factor of 1.6, thus making your 75-300 an actual 120-480.<br>

Over time, this will make you want to buy a new wide angle lens which projects onto the smaller area. :-)

<p>My 2 cents, hope it helps!

That's a technical problem at the moment.

<p>However, since the resolution of a human eye isn't all that great, especially at greater distances, current projectors are OK in my opinion.

<br>You'll only get a 1280x1024 or so pixel resolution, but if you sit a few meters away from the image that's not so much worse to the human eye. In any case, it's better than not projecting, or waiting for higher resolution projectors, or converting to slides ...

I am currently looking for a good RAW converter and post-processing

software for my Canon EOS 20D. The camera came with <i>Canon Digital

Photo Professional 1.5.0.3</i> (DPP) and the <i>Canon Digital EOS

Solution Disk 9.1</i>, so tried those. DPP turned out to be a rather

simple program, though.

<p>So, I've just downloaded and tried <a

href="http://www.dxo.com/en/photo/optics_pro/default.php">DxO Optics

Pro 2.2</a>, which seems to do a much better job (at first glance, at

least).

<ul>

<li>Is it worth buying?

<li>What other software should I look at first?

<li>Is there better stuff?

</ul>

Thanks for your experiences and opinions!

Well, while all of the above is true, isn't it still nice to have maximum speed?

I would go for a SanDisk Extreme III, which is currently the fastest CF around. Most cameras don't even support their full potential yet. But it's still a noticable difference, and you do get faster downloads.

I have a 2000 and it's great!

If you want to spend more money, spend it on good lenses.

Are you sure? I would think that if you scan at half the resolution at a 200% scale, you actually lose information (compared to the full resolution scan). The file size would be the same, but the amount of information in the image would not.

It depends on whether the scanning software is smart enough to realize that someone who wants to scan at half the resolution and then scale up to 200%, really just wants to scan at full resolution. However, most software that I know does only what you tell it to do. So in this example, it would actually scan at half resolution, and then take the small image and scale it up to 200%.

I use a Heliopan Circular Polarizer. Heliopan filters offer very good quality at a reasonable price. I can still use my lens hood over the filter. All I need to do is remove the hood when I adjust the polarizer. I would certainly not recommend Cokins or some such. If it's a filter that you use frequently, it makes sense to spend some money on it, or the filter will become your weakest link.

Most Heliopan filters also come in a so-called "slim" version which helps reduce vignetting for wide-angle lenses (such as 24mm). The only drawback of the slim filters is that you cannot screw more filters on top of a slim filter. Does not affect the lens hood though, because the hood is still directly attached to the lens (at least in my case, and in yours, if you use Canon EF lenses).