robert_hohlfelder

<p>Yup, your sky is overexposed. More specifically, if you examine your sky in an image editor, you can see that the blue channel is at full scale- 255- in most of the sky. The values in the green and red channels are still increasing as the sky gets brighter and brighter. It is because the blue is at full scale while the other color values are still increasing that you get the color shift away from blue towards green.</p>

<p>The D70 is obviously an old model, but it will support remote TTL flash with an SB600/800/etc, and it'll autofocus with the old-style AF-D lenses. Those are two useful features that the present-day D40 lacks. The ability of some bodies (like the D200) to meter with manual-focus lenses is not as useful as it sounds, since none of the DX SLRs have viewfinders that are even close to those of the old manual film bodies. I'd rather use a D70 with AF lenses than a D200 with manual focus lenses. (For shooting anything that might move, anyway...)</p>

<p>I was unimpressed by iPhoto when I began using iView Media Pro on my Mac in 2004. It was purchased by Microsoft & is now sold under the name "Microsoft Expression Media". It's a great tool for organizing, tagging & viewing photos, and it doesn't bury photos in hidden archives. It's a bit long-in-the-tooth (Microsoft hasn't done much with it- what a surprise!) and definitely doesn't have the workflow/editing abilities of Lightroom/Aperture- but it's very functional.</p>

You are exactly correct- with the D300, your rotate the advance mode (if that's what it's called) dial to "mirror up". Then the first press of the shutter release will flip the mirror up, and the second press will actually release the shutter. The D90's method should be fine for stationary subjects. I haven't used the mirror-up mode much, so I don't know how much of a difference it makes.

I really enjoy my D300. I'm sure the D90 would be great, too, but I really like the solid feel and simple user

interface of the D300 (by "simple", I'm talking about things like dedicated buttons for white balance & ISO, and

no silly special modes). Before I had the camera, I assumed that the 51 autofocus sensors would be overkill, but

actually I find them to be useful: you've got an AF sensor pretty much anywhere you would want to place your

subject. I haven't had any issues with dust.

Sadly, the latest news is that Carl's Darkroom is closing their doors.

The D90 would be the better choice due to better performance at high ISO. Get the body only and use the $300 price difference to help fund a lens. For shooting sports at night you really will want a good lens- a used Nikon 80-200 f2.8 D ($500-$700) would offer a lot of performance for the dollar. Add an inexpensive 18-55 zoom for general snapshots.

I've owned and used an assortment of inexpensive Nikon telephoto zooms. I've no major complaints with any of

them; the Achilles heel is always the slow aperture at the long end. The (current production) 55-200 VR zoom is

relatively inexpensive, nicely lightweight, and its VR is quite effective. My 70-300 ED zoom is noticeably

sharper at 200mm than the 55-200; I think it holds up decently at 300mm. And the 70-300G is better than it has

any right to be at the price. If you liked your Promaster, I think you'd be happy with any of the Nikon options.

I'm using the previous (4.x) version of DXO to process JPEGs and RAW files from my D70.

 

Likes:

- The DXO "Smart Vibrancy" (color adjustment) works really nicely. On full "auto" setting, it improves the look of my images 95% of the time. It takes me a good chunk of time to get similar results in Photoshop.

- I'm happy with the quality of its RAW conversions.

- The optical corrections can be very useful. For example: my Tokina 12-24 has some chromatic aberration on the short end; DXO completely fixes it.

 

Dislikes:

- A lot of lens/body combinations are not supported.

- Uses a fairly strict copy protection scheme, which is a bit of a hassle to deal with.

- UI is a little goofy, but you get used to it (supposedly there are some major revisions in v5).

My D70 / SB600 combination tends to expose on the low side- not unlike the sample images posted above. I dial in some exposure compensation when needed.

After 3 1/2 years, my D70 developed many hot pixels. No problem at ISO200 or 400, but they were bad at 800 & faster at shutter speeds 1/15 & slower. I sent it back to Nikon, hoping they could "map out" the bad ones. They wound up replacing the sensor!

Not an isolated incident. I let my subscription lapse over the summer, and I just received my collections letter from North Shore Agency.

 

The publisher of OP is :

Werner Publishing Corporation

12121 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90025-1176

 

The Office of the California Attorney General is:

<http://ag.ca.gov/>

I follow the advice of this page:<BR>

<A HREF="http://www.prime-junta.net/pont/How_to/a_Brush_Your_Sensor/a_Brush_Your_Sensor.html">http://www.prime-junta.net/pont/How_to/a_Brush_Your_Sensor/a_Brush_Your_Sensor.html</A><BR>

And have had good success.

You won't need to head into the mountains to capture the ght skies, but you well want to get away from Albuquerque; the city generates plenty of light pollution. The same is true for Santa Fe, to a lesser degree. Vast areas of the state are very dark at night, and dry, clear conditions are the norm.

Like Joshua said, a personal locator beacon (PLB) is probably the best thing to have if you're really, really, in trouble. Lots of good info on these sites:<BR>

<A HREF="http://www.equipped.org/faq_plb/default.asp">http://www.equipped.org/faq_plb/default.asp</A>

<BR><A HREF="http://www.sarsat.noaa.gov/">http://www.sarsat.noaa.gov/</A>

I have the 12-24 Tokina and am pleased with it. Yes, at the widest zoom settings there is some CA toward the edge of the image. I wouldn't call it "bad", but it can be seen clearly at 100% magnification. I use DXO Optics Pro to process my images, and it fixes the CA. At roughly half the price of the Nikon equivalent, I am entirely satisfied with the Tokina.

The Wire Pass trailhead is an access point to two spectacular areas: Coyote Buttes (with the famous "Wave"), and Buckskin Gulch, the longest slot canyon in the southwestern US. There's some good info at wikipedia: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckskin_Gulch">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckskin_Gulch</A><BR>

You don't need a reservation to hike Buckskin Gulch, but you do need one for Coyote Buttes (which is booked months in advance).

Thanks for the photos, JD.

 

Doug, my wife has done the hike from the end of Hole-in-the-Rock road down to the lake. She says it's a bit of a scramble, but really not bad.

 

Some people in my 4-wheel-drive club have driven the portion of Hole-in-the-Rock east of the lake. Apparently it's quite rough, requiring a modified 4WD vehicle- but it's still there!

I use an SB600 with my D70 and am very happy with it. The wireless feature works beautifully. I don't see why you'd outgrow it.

I use an SB16 with my N80 and the combination works well. Features like rear sync and exposure compensation are controlled by the body, and work fine. Just set the flash to its "TTL" setting and shoot away. With modern flashes, the N80 can perform a preflash to help determine the flash exposure. It doesn't do this with the SB16- thus, flash metering might not be as accurate as with a newer flash. I haven't found this to be a problem.

While Steve Grimes has passed away, the S.K. Grimes shop is still in business. I received a CLA'd lens back from them just yesterday. See: http://www.skgrimes.com

"nikkor 28-100G and 70-300G. They produce pretty good but not so sharp images, at least compared to my point and shoot sony digital mavica" - Those two Nikkors, while inexpensive, should easily be capable of giving results of higher quality than a sony digital Mavica. It's unlikely that purchasing a new lens will fix this problem. The poor quality is more likely a result of problems with technique and/or processing. It's hard to say more without additional details.

I can't comment on third-party flashguns. One option you might consider would be an older Nikon TTL flash. I use an SB-16 (mid 1980's) with my N80. It's bulky, but it puts out a lot of light and works beautifully with the N80.

I have an FE2, which is pretty similar to your FM3A. Here's what I do to get fill flash with my FE2:<BR>

(1) Set my exposure manually, making sure to keep my shutter speed at 1/250 or below. <BR>

(2) Use the exposure compensation dial to set from -1 1/3 to -2 stops of exposure compensation.<BR>

(3) Shoot! The exposure compensation will affect the TTL flash, but it will not affect the "ambient" exposure, which was set manually.<BR>

I believe your FM3A has a fill flash button, which will set the flash to -1EV exposure compensation. You could just leave the camera in aperture priority mode, and press that button whenever you want fill flash.<BR>

You mention macro work. If you want to use flash as the main light source (not as fill), here's what you'd do:

(1) Set the exposure manually, making the background as dark or as light as you want<BR>

(2) Leave the exposure compensation dial set to 0. <BR>

(3) Shoot. <BR>

<P>I use the MAXi343 for hiking and backpacking and recommend it. It's the lightest decent tripod around. With only one leg section extended, it's short but reasonably solid. At full extension it's flimsy, but still useful for some applications. I use it with my N80, comparable in weight to your EOS. I like the ball head- it's well made and locks solidly. I don't know if it's removable. The legs can't spread wide, so there would be no advantage to shortening the center column (other than small weight savings). </P>

 

<P>Have you seen Robert Segal's survey of light tripods? It's at:<BR>

<A HREF="http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2gkrc/Tripod-Test.html">http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2gkrc/Tripod-Test.html</A>

</P>