tenmegapixels

<p>I don't know about you, David, but I'd rather carry less weight around than more. I'm a 63 y/o guy of average proportions and in reasonably good shape. By the time I load up a pack with three or four f/2.8 zoom lenses, a camera (currently a D200 with an 800e on order), a Gitzo Series 2 CF tripod and head, and other miscellaneous items, I'm looking at 30-40 pounds. That's a lot for me to schlep around, especially if I have to go any distance. Call me girly, but I'm not getting any younger. I've thought about a D3x or a D4, but they're BIG! And heavy! If you're a large enough man for that not to be an issue for you, congratulations! If I can get the features I want in a lighter body, I'm going for it.</p><div></div>

Not to my knowledge! There are so many combinations of film and developer that you have to experiment. You first have to pick a film and a developer that you think will give you the characteristics that you like. Then you have to determine what ISO you want to use to expose the film. (Many shooters use a slightly slower value than that given by the manufacturer; that is, they slightly over-expose the film.) The idea is to find the right development time so that the contrast of the negative will give you detail in the highlights as well as the shadows. To accomplish this, you have to expose the negative so that the film gets enough light to capture the shadow detail. If the highlights are very bright (too many zones between the shadow and the highlights; i.e. a high-contrast scene), then you have to reduce the development time so that the negative contrast doesn't exceed what can be printed. It's a trial and error approach. You might increase the development time for negatives shot on an overcast day (low contrast scene) or decrease it on negatives shot on high-contrast days. And, of course, the subject matter will come into play, as well as your artistic intentions - do you want a high- or low-key image for example. Experience, experience and experience are the factors that will allow you to achieve your goals.

The gist of the recent Supreme Court decision is that the "rule of reason" should be applied to price maintenance efforts rather than the "per se" approach. The Court did not overturn the entire body of law since the 1911 case was adjudicated. Economists appear to be in agreement that not all vertical pricing constraints are anti-consumer. The Court agreed, and said that each case should be weighed on its own merits. It's no so much a matter of turning back the clock and repeating history, but rather a refinement of the way the law is applied.

May I suggest Googling "ban on resale price maintenance" and going to the Wikipedia link. The last paragraph of the article references the case being discussed here. Follow the link to "Leegin Creative..." Then read the SCOTUS's summary (Slip opinion of the Court) written by Justice Kennedy. The debate centers around whether minimum price agreements are "per se" always wrong, or whether the "rule of reason" should be applied so that a determination of the effects of the particular pricing arrangement can be made. The distinctions made are enlightening, complete with examples of each. BTW, I am not a lawyer, but my girlfriend is, and she always reminds me that the devil is in the details, and that the actual case must be studied before forming an opinion about the court's decision. She's usually right.

I have a D200 that replaced a D70. I also have an F100 for which I have the full set of AFS zooms (17-35,28-70 and 80-200). I do a lot of event photography using the D200, and I got tired of carrying around the two shorter lenses. So, I bought the 18-70DX Nikon consumer zoom based largely on reviews by Thom Hogan. Landscape is my love, however. The 17-35 is a fabulous lens by any measure, but it's $1500. The performance of the 18-70 doesn't quite match it, but it's $350 and a fine lens as well. Depending on the depths of your pockets and your enlargement goals, you could make either choice.