Rick Waller

<p>Just adding that if rolling the batts doesn't clean contacts, try using the eraser end of a pencil to rub the contacts.</p> <p>As for where to repair - I would get a price to overhaul/fix the SB600. You might find that the cost to repair makes no sense when you can buy a used one. That's the problem with a lot of electronic gear. It is often only a small amount more to just buy a new one. KEH currently has a used one for $200. A new 700 is roughly $325. Compare cost to repair to cost to replace and make the call.</p>

<p>" <strong>f8 is very good on every lens I've ever tested"</strong><br> <strong> </strong><br> <strong><br /></strong>Think that may explain why, when someone asked the famous photojournalist from the 30's and 40's how he managed to <strong>always</strong> get the great shot, Weegee is reputed to have replied, "F8 and be there".<br> :)</p>

<p>I tried this lens for one afternoon and returned it immediately. I found it to be noticeably inferior to both the 24-70 and the 70-200. Especially at the longer end. Was unimpressed with sharpness/color/contrast/snap of the images.</p> <p>Not that it was terrible (except at >200mm or so) and it is certainly convenient, but if you live and die with the 24-70/70-200 combo, I am not sure you will accept just "ok".</p> <p>I do own the new version of the 70-300 and I do pair that lens with the 24-70 if I want to reduce weight. While that lens is still not perfect at > say 250mm or so, it does do a better job between 70-250 than the 28-300 in my hands.</p>

<p>"<em>Does anyone see a parallel here?"</em><br /> <br /> Actually, no I do not.<br /> <br /> <em>"Does anyone know if there are other, perhaps more significant, changes in the behavior of the Speedlight when used with this camera? Yes, indeed, the flash does fire when taking a shot and the exposure is not obviously different from what one might expect."</em><br /> Folks have answered your question by saying that the iTTL automates a lot of the manual adjustments that you make manually and does so instantaneously, yet you then argue that there is nothing wrong with your existing gear. Most of the replies admit that the 26 will do a great job if you know what you are doing. The point I and the others were making is that the new technology makes it seamless and idiot proof. <br /> If the old technology works fine for you (I am sure it does)- by all means knock yourself out. But there really is not much need to be sarcastic when well meaning folks answered your question about whether the new strobes do anything better. They do. They allow you to work much faster (in an almost point and shoot mode) when you do not have the luxury of playing with manual settings.</p> <p> Just out of curiosity - do you turn off the AF when shooting with your D800? If not, why not? Does the AF give you better results than manually focusing the lens? I can achieve perfect focus manually. Why did I buy an F5 to replace my F2?</p> <p> </p>

<p>Got to agree with the sentiment here. I used the SB26 when it was top dog in the Nikon arsenal and it performed great. While it will still do the job especially if most of what you shoot is manually set, the "smarts" of the new iTTL flashes (800, 900 and 910) are almost surreal. </p> <p>If you mount one of these iTTL units on a modern body, you would have to work very hard to screw up the exposure. I fully understand the desire (and often the need) to work in manual, but you have to experience what the new puppies can do if you let them decide for you. <br> When shooting portraits during studio sessions or on-site weddings, I will default to manual. But when it is time to shoot candids or where the consistency of the lighting is difficult (indoor and out, but especially out), it is hard to beat iTTL. </p>

<p>I visit Cabo regularly and if I never set foot in CSL again, it would not bother me. Do explore Todos Santos though and up to La Paz. Quite different.</p> <p>Enjoy the trip. </p> <p>by the way - if budget permits, try dinner at H restaurant. Good chow in pretty setting.</p> <p> </p>

<p>I suggest a renting a car and taking a day ride up the west side of the isthmus from Cabo towards Todos Santos. It is a cute and photegenic town. Have lunch at the Hotel California if you are a fan of 70's music. You can Google things to do and see along the way. <br> I found a lot to shoot along Rt 19 between Cabo and Todos Santos - especially many huge Saguaro Cacti most of which are filled with big, black buzzrds. Make for a nice composition - sort of Hitchcock like with the ungly birds on the arms of the towering cacti.<br> From Todos Santos, you can continue north to LaPaz which is also interesting. If you go there, check out Espirito Santo for wildlife - marine and avian. If you hit LaPaz , you will need at least one overnight.</p> <p>Sunrises and sunsets are very photogenic and easy to shoot. Whale watching (depending on your season) is very exciting. Cabo San Lucas is the wild town crowded with young folks working to stay pretty drunk for their entire stay. If you are an adult with a spouse, Cabo San Lucas is fun for a night or so. Great opportunity to shoot street life. <br> When you tire of the crowds and alcohol in CSL, run up the coridor and visit San Jose del Cabo which is the "other" cabo. Far less crowded, far fewer drunks and way nice local shops and excellent restaurants. Good food can be found up and down the entire Corridor linking the 2 Cabo's. Easy, short taxi or rental drive. In fact, I recommend staying along the strip between the 2 towns for ease in visiting both.</p> <p>One last thing about Mexico's version of TSA. Major league pain in the ass with photo gear when i tried to fly home. They confiscated a 2" Allen wrench which I carry in my bag to attach my camera plate. Guy told me it was a "tool". I began to argue with him and actually got a little heated, but my wife had the good sense to pull me away. I think she had visions of her Yanqui husband spending a couple of nights in a Mexican jail. The sercurity was incredibly lax, but no one was going to get a 2" allen wrench past his lane.</p>

<p>" but I'm taking her to dinner tonight and we're gonna go over some basics..."</p> <p>I do the same with my wife before every one of her birding trips - that is familiarize her with the basics. Been doing this for the past 35 years and every time we sit down, I literally have to begin with "This is the shutter release." If a person is not a photographer who "learns" what she is doing gradually, no amount of last minute cramming will work. Take it from one who has learned this lesson from repeated failures.</p> <p>My wife is a super high functioning, wonderful, smart woman who simply will not process photography instruction. Notice I say "will not" rather than "cannot". </p>

<p>I have never used a 55/2.8AF, but does the body focus other lenses?</p> <p>Edit - sorry. i didn't notice that you say other lenses work well.</p>

<p>I wholeheartedly agree with Jim. Compared to Jerusalem, which surely must be the most fascinating city in the world in terms of photo ops (combine the modernity with the ancient and throw in the religious ties to Judaism, Christianity and Islam and it is almost a slam dunk), Tel Aviv is a roaring bore. </p> <p>I visited Tel Aviv before going on to Jerusalem and was so disappointed in TA. I found little in the architecture or the history to warrant much attention. There are numerous historic sites pertaining to the founding of Israel, but while certainly interesting, there is nothing special photographically. There is a Bauhaus section that my architectural buddies oohed and aahed about, but to me is was nothing special. I agree that Jaffa which sits adjacent to TA and is an easy walk from the big TA seaside hotels is interesting in that you get to see the interaction between the Muslims and the Jews in an interesting ancient city (remember TA is a relatively recent city - it really did not exist as it is today prior to 1948),</p> <p>I found the most interesting part of TA was the spectacular beach and promenade that runs the entire length of the city and actually continues into Jaffa.</p> <p>Jerusalem is not a long drive from TA (in fact nothing within Israel proper is a long drive since the country is so small) and I agree that if you want to get the most bang for the buck, get up early, get a ride to Jerusalem and head straight for the old City. Words cannot describe how fascinating that city is. Just a reminder that the international airport is midway between the two major cities. If your free day corresponds to your first or last day, it would make it far more convenient.</p> <p>By the way - i suggest that your wide to normal to short tele lenses will get the biggest workout. If I had to recommend one lens, it would be a zoom in the 24-105 range. I had a 70-300 with me and I don't recall using it at all. </p>

<p>If your goal is to shoot hdr, then a tripod is a must. As far as monopods and stability in general - they are certainly not as good as 3 legged support, but with practice, it is possible to gain proficiency with the stick. </p>

<p>At the risk of stating the obvious, the 60mm macro would be quite useful shooting flora on the way up and down. That said, I do not carry a dedicated macro when trying to minimize the weight of my pack. Instead, I use my old trusty Canon 500 diopter which conveniently is the same 77 thread size as the 70-200. The diopter on the 70-200 can do wonderful things for macro with very little weight and bulk; a fraction the size and weight of the 60. If you do not expect to shoot macro, what is the point of dragging along that lens? You have other choices that will cover you at 60mm. I understand how sharp and how fast the 60 is, but if you can't manage the weight, decide where to compromise. If I were not expecting to shoot flowers along the way, a macro lens would never make it into my packl.</p> <p>I personally would never travel without the 70-200. Yes it is big and heavy, but for my purposes, I find that the 200mm reach is often very desirable in landscape shots - I use mine often to isolate specific features in a landscape. I recently picked up a 24-120 (the new one) to take the place of the 28-70 and 70-200 combo since as I get older, it becomes more and more difficult to hump the two 2.8 lenses. I do miss the extra 80mm on the long end, but everything is a compromise.<br> One other suggestion. While I appreciate your desire to bring the tripod, you might want to consider a monopod instead. Will help with your support problem and makes a great walking stick at a substantial weight savings. Better yet, when climbing down into the canyon, another alternative would be to grab a table top set of legs and a small ballhead (both of which can be carried in your belt) and just prop it against any nearby convenient rock, ledge, tree or the ground. Saves a lot of weight.</p> <p>Good luck with your quest. Be sure to have extra batts and cards. All the gear on your back becomes paperweights if your batts die or your cards fill.</p>

<p>Your dilemma is quite common. All landscape photographers dream of a lightweight, medium range zoom that is sharp throughout the frame. The problem is that lightweight and edge to edge sharpness are pretty much mutually exclusive. If you want edge to edge sharpness in a zoom, you have the 14-24 and 24-70, but those are certainly not lightweight.</p> <p>If light weight is as important to you as exteme sharpness corner to corner, I can think of no solution other than a set of primes. Of course, you lose the benefit of having a one lens solution and juggling/carrying lenses in the field may be incovenient.</p> <p>I fear that you are wishing for something that is simply not currently available at the focal lengths you seek. Everything you look at other than primes will force you to compromise on weight or sharpness, but with primes, you lose the convenience factor.</p> <p> In case you think you are alone, I have been scouring the internet for a killer sharp 14-200/2.8 zoom lens with a 52mm front filter thread and which weighs 10 ounces. Haven't had much luck so far, but hope springs eternal.</p>

<p>I agree that a Pelican Case is an excellent way to transport sensitive gear safely, but only in terms of the protection from physical abuse that it provides.</p> <p>The problem is that when shipping in a Pelican Case, you might just as well put a big red "STEAL ME" sign on the side of the case. Baggage theives know quite well that Pelican cases are used to ship valuable gear. They may be thieves, but they are not stupid.</p> <p>When I travel and need to get my gear somewhere, I ship it in a Pelican via Fed Ex or UPS. Yes it costs more, but is quite a bit less expensive than not having the gear at a shoot.</p>