nolefan32

Unless someone has somehow devised a version of Photoshop that can automatically crash itself after a year's time, I don't see Adobe going for this at all. Once software is loaded onto your computer, it would be to tempting to just return the disks and continue using the program without paying for it, so what would be the point of anyone purchasing Photoshop at it's full price. That would be my impression, I could be wrong.

 

If that is the case, you might want to look into Photoshop Essentials. It's the core tools from Photoshop for a lot less green.

Consider me to be in the camp of those who prefer smaller cards and treating them like film. True that CF cards are remarkably stable, but if you get the one lemon in a zillion and it waits to rear its ugly head only after you've filled up the card with a whole vacation's worth of photos that weren't yet downloaded, then you've lost everything. At least if you use multiple smaller cards, you only lose part of everything.

 

I don't know that I'd get too small of a card, though. One of digital's advantages is that the cards can be quite large and hold a lot of images, and it is nice to not have to stop in the middle of an event like a wedding to change out (though it's much quicker to switch CF cards than it is to change film).

 

My personal philosphy, for our Canon 10Ds we yse here at work, we use 1GB cards, and always have a couple on us for shooting. I see 4GB and 8GB advertised, but those strike me as being intended for people shooting monster-sized cameras like the EOS 1Ds Mk II or Hasselblads.

I concur with Rob's suggestion, go to a camera store that carries both and hold them for yourself. Reason being, the only complaints I've ever heard about the Rebel XT is that it's just very small and light, it feels like an easily breakable toy. Personally that's been my impression as well -- I felt like if I squeezed too hard, it would crumble in my hand, something I just couldn't get past. But I've not read one complaint about image quality in comparision to it's more expensive siblings, or about the reality of it's build quality (vs. all the comments about it's *percieved* build quality). Therefore if the size and weight don't bother you and you don't need the added features of its big brother, you might be able to save your money and get more accessories.

Vladamir, if it's a wide strap you want, I know Domke makes one that's 1 1/2" wide, basically the same thing they use as shoulder straps on their camera bags. They've got thinner (1"), but that's pretty much the standard, the 1 1/2" is the widest I've seen. I just peeked at B&H and they've got the wide strap for $17, but I'm sure anyone who sells Domke gear probably has them.

Mike Meloy - My bad. For some reason, I was thinking of the 24-70/2.8 IS; guess I'm just so used to people comparing that lens and the 24-105, my brain just made that leap. I did manage to catch myself and adjust about half my response, but missed where I said that.

 

Thanks for the wake-up smack.

I've been researching out lenses for a digital outfit, and based on the reviews I've read, the 24-105 and 70-200 2.8 IS are highly rated lenses. The 17-40 is described as a "good value". The 100-400 didn't fare as well -- it's apparently got problems with vignetting that's noticeable even with 3/4 CCD cameras; it's especially pronounced with full-frame CCDs, like in the 5D.

 

If money weren't an issue, my personal choice (based on what I've read and not on personal experience with these specific lenses, admittedly) would be the 24-105 and 70-200. Having the overlap would mean changing lenses less often, and with the full-frame CCD, the range from 17-24 that you'd get with the 17-40 (and sacrifice the 40-70 to get) is pretty wide and you probably won't miss it. If you were talking about a CCD with a multiplier factor attached, then you probably would want that range more. And as for the slower f-stop on the 24-105 as compared to the 17-40, the IS would do a pretty reasonable job of compensating for that.

 

If you want to boost into that upper range between 200 and 400, Canon's got some good extension tubes that would do the trick on the 70-200, and with these lenses, you shouldn't have to sacrifice much in the way of sharpness.

Count me among those who agree a hard-sided case is almost always overkill. They're totally non-functional in almost all circumstances, except for storing and shipping very expensive gear. Even then, many of the soft-sided cases out there provide more than sufficient protection without sacrificing useability. And realize that Nikon builds some pretty solid stuff, designed to be banged up a bit and keep on taking pictures. If you are still nervous about damage, get insurance.

 

Consider the type of shooting you plan to do, and take a look at your options with soft-side bags. Lowepro is pretty popular with pros, building bags that are functional and protective at the same time, and they've got a nice selection of backpacks, shoulder bags, etc.

Check out Lowepro's website (www.lowepro.com). They've got a nice selection of backpack style and roller style bags (some that can go both ways), though you might be asking a lot with 10 lenses. For as much equipment as you're wanting to keep in the thing all at once, I would definitely go with a backpack or roller or roller-backpack; anything else would just get to be too heavy.

I've got a Nikon EL2 that I bought used in the early 80s, and it's never given me a moment's trouble. I've dropped it and banged it up to the point I once smashed in the prism and had to have it repaired because the flash would no longer slide into the hotshoe, but the camera continued to take beautiful pictures even then. I've found the metering system to be pretty accurate; even when I shoot in automatic mode, I've gotten great color depth, contrast and density. Lenses don't require the metering bracket, such as was the case with the earlier models. And the camera runs on a standard 6-volt battery, which is pretty easy to find and last about six months to a year depending on how much you shoot. In summary, I found it to be an excellent workhorse camera that's never once let me down.

Okay, so it�s looking like time to mothball my 35mm outfit and get a

DSLR. And as part of that, I also need to replace my ratty old Kiwi

bag (are they still in business?). What bags do you guys recommend

for a good all-around bag that�s functional for traveling and the

like? We�re talking a large-frame DSLR with three or four lenses and

a flash. As a former photojournalist, I�m partial to shoulder bags

for their easy access and don�t mind a little weight on my shoulder.

Two lines I like the look of are the Domke J-series and the Lowepro

Stealth Reporter AW series, but I�m open to other bags. Thanks.