dennis lee

<p>Wow, more great insight, thanks again. Nice shots Ray, if you hadn't told me I could of sworn that first shot was a Winogrand.</p>

<p>I did a little checking and the rental rates for the M8/.2 are astoundingly reasonable. What is up with that?! Hey, I'm not complaining... I'm probably going to do a rental (wish I had known this was so affordable earlier, I would have loved to have really shot this job with it...) and see what September 9 brings. Pretty exciting in a very expensive non affordable way... but what the heck, might as well wait and see. And yes, tax year closing is still pretty far off.</p>

<p>Ray, your second shot above reminded me of this M shot from a few years back. Felt the urge to post something here... it's been a while.</p>

<div></div>

<p>Wow, thanks again. September is so close and FF so... desired I guess, I'll probably wait and see what happens with Leica and any M9 announcements. In the meanwhile I may rent an M8.2 and see how it feels.</p>

<p>Ray, always love seeing your images. Surprised there aren't any M8 images in the portfolio. Or did I miss them? Also surprised on your comment about the 'dead aim' of the camera. Do you attribute that to the magnification factor?</p>

<p>Peter, I was wondering if the 50 might not be nice a little longer. Although I never cared for the 28 too much on the M camera (it was my daily go to lens for years and years on the Nikon - 28/2 - best lens ever) I've been thinking it might not be too bad with the X factor either. Nice assembly of equipment you have there.</p>

<p>Price is a concern for me and the only reason I'm thinking about doing this at all is that I've had a pretty good year financially and would like to offset some taxes by buying a little gear. This kind of opportunity doesn't knock to often, so if it offers me a chance to get into a digital Leica I kinda feel like jumping on it. Of course the cost of glass after the body is always a concern too.</p>

<p>Digitally/professionally I've got all the glass I need and frankly don't care for these big Nikon zooms but they really do the job when you need them. A second D700 wouldn't be a terrible idea. But the idea of a rangefinder to mix up the take a little and add something a little different is just too appealing. It seems like I'm so busy shooting for work lately (actually all my time is in post) that it's at work that I find my personal pictures. If I find any at all, which is another reason for the Leica. Reminds me of guys like Burk Uzzle who carried a Leica with them on corporate jobs to get the occasional personal pictures. That sounds good to me.</p>

<p>Thanks guys. I'm liking what I'm hearing.</p>

<p>Ron, I'd never make this kind of decision based on forum advice. But, there's a lot of knowledge out there from people like you that have been M users for years and have made this leap. I like the fact that the switch was seamless for you and that you have no thoughts of looking back. That's a pretty good endorsement.</p>

<p>I think renting the 8.2 is a great idea. The thought of a FF M9 coming out is exciting yet financially frightening. I'd probably want the FF so bad but not be able to afford it that I wouldn't by either. Speaking of which, the $2k difference between the 8 and 8.2 is pretty substantial. That's a bit of a tough choice too.</p>

<p>Thanks again, Dennis</p>

<p>Peter,<br>

As a photographer of 60 years, how do you like using the new M8 or M8.2 compared to the older M cameras? Same thrill in a different body?</p>

<p>Thinking of rejoining the family myself and looking for some opinions. Seems like the 8.2 is the way to go... but $2K difference, that's substantial.</p>

<p>Thanks, Dennis</p>

<p>I'm thinking about buying a M8 or the newer M8.2, but I have a couple questions and concerns that I thought you might be able to help me with.</p>

<p>I shoot a lot, a lot of digital, using the D700 primarily with a couple other Nikon mount bodies as backup. I was thinking of adding another D700 to the arsenal but frankly, I'm tired of shooting so darned 'clean.' I'm coming to the end of a year long construction project that I've been documenting for some builders and a month or so ago I began shooting film with one of my old Leicas just to mix it up a bit. For me, there is nothing more intuitive, loose, energetic and possibly immediate than the look I get with the Leica. Don't get me wrong, I love SLR's and I couldn't do my job without them, but after a while the precise framing becomes boring and the necessity - or desire - for something more intuitive aesthetically, like the Leica rangefinder comes in.</p>

<p>The film workflow just isn't working either for the old M's... well, it does and doesn't... B&W C-41 aint Tri-X and I don't have time for scanning and cleaning...</p>

<p>I know my Leicas and I know rangefinders, that's not my question.</p>

<p>First, the DX (1.5X) format of earlier digital Nikons really bugged me, the Leica is 1.3X right? How do you feel about that? I like my 50 to be a fifty. I know my 50. It's the best and most useful lens in the bag. How's it feel on the M8 with the X factor? Will I like it? I'm reaching out to 50 users here. People who really know what a 50 can do. How about the 35...? It comes in at about 46~47mm? How's that feel on the M8? Does it come close to replacing my 50?</p>

<p>How's the high ISO? What's the highest really useable quality, let's say for a wedding job?</p>

<p>Does this camera feel and work like the old M's I'm used to? Only with the ease and trouble digital brings?</p>

<p>Is it true my two favorite lenses; my 50DR and 21/3.4 won't work with it?</p>

<p>Is this a camera that will make an old time rangefinder shooter happy?</p>

<p>Looking forward to your replies, thanks.</p>

<p>Dennis</p>

Just looked at your picture, looks great.

I've read that too, the difference between the S5 & D700 being not so great but in different directions. I'm still shooting

the D700 similar to how I shot the S5, exposing more for the mid tone or even shadow and then pulling the highlight back

in post. This just isn't working with the D700 and I need to change.

That said, I don't think the latitude of the D700 to pull detail out of the shadow is so much greater than the Fuji to do the

same. I think the S5 is very good at that too. It's just seldom used because the files come out of the camera much

flatter, or less contrasty. On the other hand, there is no comparison on the high end. The S5 just wins hands down.

The difference comes in handling of the cameras themselves. The S5 can be shot on auto and practically everything is

salvageable in post. In my experience so far. The D700 needs to be exposed more for the highlights if you want to save

them, and then hope for a scene that is not to broad in spectrum. The D700 as you experienced does seem to be able to

hold it's shadow detail.

I'm still in the experimentation stage with the D700 myself, and exposure is a big factor. Time will tell. I like the camera.

Do you have a D700 now? Or were you just playing with one for that shot above. Looks like a pretty idilic place.

MS Keil, Don't let that 6MP stuff fool you, I believe you'll want to take advantage of all that great DR and that happens at

12MP. Do some testing. I doubt you'll go down to 6...

Dave Perkes,

I bought the D700 because I've been crying for FF since digital began. I'm not sorry I bought it, but it is different. The

next gen of D700 will be special, probably with video like the 5D. If you can wait for the next generation it might not be

such a bad idea. I couldn't, and I'm not disappointed. As a matter of fact I'll probably be in line for the next generation

when it does arrive. Took the S5 into the city today. Haven't seen the files on the big screen yet, but I'm sure they'll look

great. But, focus was slow (now that I'm getting used to speed again) and I could have used a little more ISO a few

times.

Went to ICP and saw some Cornell Capa and W. Eugene Smith original prints. Man, we've got a long way to go with this

digital stuff.

One final thought, I was out today with the D700 shooting in a corn field maze. I like to shoot towards the sun and I do it

a lot. I certainly lost a lot of detail in the sky today. Simply nothing there in the white clouds. I'm not going to say this

doesn't happen with the Fuji, but I will say that it doesn't happen at this level. I will certainly need to rethink my

exposures again with this D700. Really wish I had taken the S5 along today for more comparison work. But boy was it

nice to use my old 28/2 today...

Good luck,

Dennis

MS Keil,

Nice images, looking at them I think you would enjoy the Fuji S5 very much. I see you like richly lit and colorful scenics

along with people in both BW and color. The S5 totally rocks at this stuff. It does fall a little short in the high res category if

that's really important to you. That said, some of the guys on the Fuji forum have really perfected sharpening techniques wit the S5.

There's also some great work over there, check it out.

Dennis

The S5 is a fantastic camera. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. It does have a few foibles but they don't affect image

quality. I shot some scenics today with the D700 and clouds in the sky started flashing (blown highlight display), this

wouldn't have happened with the S5. I leave my DR on 400% all the time.

Yeah, prices on the S5 are great right now if you can find them. I really can't decide if I will sell one of mine or not, it's that

good. If the D700 were not Full Frame, I would still be shooting with the S5 as my daily kick around... gladly. But I have

really missed full frame. If only Fuji would produce one of these for us... HEAVEN.

Where to begin?

I use both, the S5 (since it came out... 1.5 yrs?) and the D700 for close to... three weeks?

There is a difference, a pretty big difference between the two cameras in operation and capture. BUT, when it comes to

the final image, there's not a lot of difference, except that the resolution of the D700 is far superior to the S5.

Are you familiar with film?

Shooting the S5 is the closest you will come to shooting your favorite color negative film. Shooting the D700 is like

shooting the best color slide film available with perfect exposure (exposed for digital post...). If you understand that, you

understand the difference between these two cameras.

The S5 file is rich, thick, has great DR and color. It leans to magenta. The D700 file doesn't have the

DR depth of the S5 but will easily hold 2 stops if exposed in the 'right' direction. Color leans to yellow in my opinion.

Color wise both are easily correctable. The S5's leaning to magenta makes it feel more friendly. But the magenta can be

slightly problematic to remove.

I tend to space out on the technical aspects of the camera when I get interested in a subject. Obviously this is

dangerous. It's amazing what I have been able to save with the S5. 3 stops over, 2 stops under... easily. Beyond that

problems begin. The D700 is nowhere near as forgiving. BUT, resolution is much higher, high ISO performance is silly

good, and when it comes to making a print, there will be few instances in which you will be able to tell the difference

between the two cameras. That said, I haven't made a lot of BW conversions yet with the D700. BW images out of the S5 are amazing

and look just like film.

I was so disappointed with the D700 when I got it I felt I had made a $3000 mistake. I did tests and comparisons and my

opinion has changed. The S5 looks great out of the camera, but with a little work the D700 easily matches the output

and has become my daily camera. There are still a few instances I experience where I wonder if the S5 would not be better, but that

moment is pretty rare, and pulling all the S5 file has to offer out in those instances can be equally challenging. The new burn tool in LR2

could be very helpful here...

The S5 is a wonderful camera. I shoot a lot of available light and find the D700 great too. Spend some time at the Fuji

S5 forum over at DPReview (good people, good forum) if you have any more questions. I'm there all the time and hope to

post some of my findings one of these days...

Did that answer your question? No it did not.

Here is your answer: NO, the D700 will not match the S5 in DR. But, the DR is decent on the D700. Decent enough to

think about exposing your files properly and taking advantage of all the other bonuses the D700 offers. Now that I have

the D700, I'm considering selling one of my two S5's... what's that tell you? I shoot people. Events and portraits in a PJ

style (which I used to be). I do all my post with LR2.

Remember the film analogy above. THAT is your answer.

Dennis

Haven't been here in ages, Hello to everyone.

The front command dial on my D2h is not longer adjusting the aperture on AFS lenses. The color is very

poor. The body armor is all coming off. This is what I sent to Nikon.

The repair estimate came back at $416 including shipping and tax.

Is it worth the repair?

I shoot events and portraits with an S5. The D2h has been retired to the camera bag as backup. I had

planned on selling the D2h to help pay for another S5 (used).

Is it possible Nikon will upgrade the color performance of this camera?

It's a wonderful camera for everything except color quality, and high ISO. Working with D2h files alongside

the S5 is torture. I would have to dedicate this camera to BW if I ended up repairing it and using it as my

second camera.

Or, will the camera net a substantially better resale price after the repair? I'm in a quandary. I've work

coming up that I really need and want a second working body for.

What shall I do?

--

Dennis

http://dennislee.smugmug.com/gallery/2516942

Hi John, I just ran into some huge problems with the Lexar 4GB 133X cards and my Epson

P2000.

Here's a link: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?

forum=1032&message=23771145

Besides losing almost half of my assistant's images, my files from the 4GB can't be stored.

I'm going to try formatting on the computer again, if that doesn't work I'll send them back

to B&H and get some Sandisk's hopefully.

Let me know if you've made any progress please.

If you are looking for a replacement for your editing suite, LR is the way to go in my

opinon.

It's fast, has lots of options, is pretty intuitive and just plain works. Make that works

great!

You can get a 30 day free trial which I highly recommend. I was sold on the beta version,

the 1.0 release is even better. Try it out.

It's also reduced in price until some time in April I think. You might want to check on that.

As for CS2 and 3 (I've been using the trial version), they are important complements to LR,

although I must admit, I harldy use them anymore.

I learned a lot of basic stuff about Photoshop with Adobe's 'Classroom in a book.'

This is a tutorial that comes with a CD and walks you through a lot of the PS operations

step-by-step. It is extremely well done, and really does take a bit of commitment to get

through, but once you have; you find yourself with a really great understanding of

photoshop and a great reference manual to boot!

I'd start with Lightroom though, and from there see how much additional processing

capability you need.

Good luck, Dennis

http://dennislee.smugmug.com/gallery/2516942

I've heard it's possible, but I can't find it in the manual.

How do I import both the JPEG and RAW file from a shoot into LR?

This was never an issue before, because I always shot RAW. Now, I have a Fuji S5 and the JPEG files are so

good I'd like to do more comparisons between the two. The S5 also offers the option of shooting B&W,

but I lose the B&W files as the RAW converter kicks in and displays the color image.

I'm working on a B&W job right now where this would be really advantageous, I just can't figure it out.

Thanks, Dennis

http://dennislee.smugmug.com/gallery/2516942

Simon, I think there might be a problem with your set-up here. It's a bit confusing for the

camera and yourself.

The edge of the table is too close to your target and the flowers in front of the type are

going to make accurate focusing on one or the other very difficult.

I suggest you redo your test. If you don't have a tripod, put the camera on the table, put

the type and type alone on the wall. Make sure the camera and the wall are perpendicular

and parallel to one another. ie, lens perpendicular and camera back parallel to the wall.

Now, using the self timer, focus first, then take the shot hands off. I think you will see a

big difference in the results. Also, I would try getting a little closer to the target. I like not

having to work so hard to check the focus and closer up will give you a better idea of the

distance accuracy.

If you think the focus is falling before or after your focus point do the same test but at

an angle to the target so that the type will identify exactly where the focus is falling.

I didn't read all the posts before this one, so I apologize if this is redundant.

Figures, I just did a huge (kinda) test today comparing sequential shots, buffer write times,

and settings.

Oh wait, your talking about scrolling through pictures, well, that's good news too. The

whole scrolling, zooming, panning (in playback) set up with this camera is somewhat

archaic. Don't you guys think? What happened here? Great images though.

Anyway, I'll post the findings of my buffer writing experiment one of these days soon.

But this is the bottom line. If you need lots of sequential pictures, you've got to turn off all

the DR. Otherwise, take your time,... and wait for that decisive moment. This camera will

not be rushed.

By the way, what's up with the tiny histogram? It'd be kinda funny if it wasn't so pathetic.

Is there a way to scroll through previous images when under magnification? I can't seem

to figure it out and don't think it's possible. I would love to hear otherwise.

For all it's foibles, I really like this camera.

Thanks for all your responses, I've already got a headache. I'm going to pass on this one

this time. Maybe next year. The lab gets this one.

No problem John.

Some of you guys make me sorry I ever asked this question here. I'm a professional

photographer, shooting for over 25 years and printing with Epson for over 6 years.

You cannot tell me that you have never had a problem with your printer. If you do, you

haven't printed enough. I've printed books with my printers, business cards, postcards,

greeting cards you name it, I've printed it. Not without a lot of learning curve and foibles.

If you haven't run into problems printing, go print some more; there is always an issue

somewhere, will it be fixable, of course, it's all a matter of time. Sheeesh.

My question is simple,

Is the 3800 a good B&W printer out of the box on an Intel based Mac or not!?

"If you can't commit to learning the technology then you should accept that you're half of

the professional that your client needs and let the other half be somebody else."

wow, that's really helpful. Gregory and John; I haven't heard about the 3800, that's why

I'm asking here. What does that have to do with my professional capabilities? I work, I

can't keep up on everything. I use this forum to get some answers and ask some advice.

Not to blindly insult people. I suppose you guys never had to ask a question or want an

opinion. Too bad.

Thanks to you guys that actually answered the question, Patrick, Rod and Jonathon.

Dennis

Fuji S3 or even the S2 are good buys right now with the new S5 out. Prices will be coming

down on the S3's and S2's are already really cheap. I just bought an S5, looks pretty darn

nice.

good luck, Dennis

http://dennislee.smugmug.com/gallery/2516942

film or digital?

film= 50/1.4 or 28/2 (28 great for shooting while you ride!)

Digital= 28/2.8 (28/2 is manual, 28/1.4 too expensive), go for the inexpensive AF.

I rode for years, always with one body and a 50 on an F3P, or a 50 on an M4, sometimes

35 on the Leica. I like the 28 on digital. Real nice do everything kind of relationship.

Good luck, Dennis

http://dennislee.smugmug.com/gallery/2516942