lee_ricks

Someone should speak for the "non Subs". The Nikon Forum is sponsored by Nikon. Likewise the Canon forum. This very page contains 6 advertisements. I am sure that Photo.net doesn't give these away. In fact, I suspect that this site is fairly profitable on the paid adverts alone.

 

I do not subscribe. I do not use the storage space, advertise my business, or use the email. I do patronize the businesses who advertise here. Information on this site helped me to decide to spend nearly $5000.00 with Nikon recently.

 

I am not thrilled that the forum gives out my email address to anyone who asks for it.

If member benefits included more security I might consider giving them money. I am also concerned with the lack of attention by the moderators on some forums. How is that for the whole load.

 

This is a nice site. I enjoy participating in it. They have yet however,to make a compelling case for subscription. As Josh said, if they increase benefits and improve security I think I would be inclined to subscribe. I find it difficult to pay money to a site that is sponsored, at least in part, by very large companies.

Just an aside. I love the 70-200 vr too but why not try the 55-200 vr for your back country lens. It is sharp, very light and not a disaster if it takes a hit. You are normally shooting, I would assume, in pretty good light. A couple of hundred bucks and a very good lens. Or, as you are shooting fleeting subjects why not the 70-300 AFS VR. The extra reach may come in handy and shooting the fast burners you are cranking up the speed anyway. Hogan likes it.

Mine is fairly tight. This is a very inconvenient door anyway. I like the one on the D2H better. And the card goes in 'backward'. What was Nikon thinking.

 

You gotta love the camera though. It is a winner.

Tell us again why you don't want a zoom? Is it that you don't feel F2.8 is fast enough? Or that good examples can't create good bokeh?

 

I am thinking of the 35-70 AF-D wich is sharp as can be and can take the place of your feet if zooming that way is too hard. It is only a 40% zoom but it can be had used in your price range no problem.

Like Shun and Lex said. Stick with your camera until the replacement significantly improves specific photo issues.

 

I have a D300 (low light) D2X (dumb) and D2H (the best camera ever made;) Care to guess which one I use most?

 

Your D80 is a great camera. It will take wonderful pictures for years to come. Enjoy it and invest in an SB-800 next if you don't have one. Then upgrade your lenses if necessary. Do you have Photoshop yet? If not that is a real important step.

I wonder, at this point, what we are talking about when we talk about pros.

 

I make my living taking picures. My choice of equipment is practical not theoretical. If I am shooting for a newspaper, which will print at a resolution similar to crayon on napkin, it is absurd for me to wory about the very small differences between lenses.

 

Other projects? Of course we want sharpness (most of the time) and we want good color saturation (most of the time) and accurate exposure (all of the time) but really. There is little observable difference between the same picture taken with the 17-55 f2.8 and the 18-70. And after the two photos are properly processed in photoshop a laughably small difference.

 

Sometimes a set of circumstances would call for the 17-55 over the 18-70 and other times the extra 15mm on the long side will be an advantage. As will be the light weight.

 

I will get a D3 soon. Not because the full frame is going to be important to me very often. Rather because it gives me more choices. Looking to the future of photojournalism far greater changes are in store than the piddling difference between the FX and DX sensor. For the generalist I suspect neither will be the end product in still digital photography. In the meantime I suspect pros will continue to balance ease of use, cost and picture quality to determine the camera they buy. Just as they always have. I still use my beloved D2H more than the D2x or D300. It doesn't do any one thing better than all of the above except this. It disappears in my hands and lets me concentrate on the photograph.

Call Cameta directly. It is a brick and mortor store. They will almost always quote a price much lower than the auction prices. After all. They don't have to pay ebay.

I have never heard so many "nevers" and "always" in my life.

 

First the 18-70 is not slow. And frankly F2.8 ain't that fast either. I have published literally hundreds of pictures taken with the 18-70. It IS a tough lens. I have it on the camera much more than my 17-55 f2.8. It is light, focuses fast, and produces great images.

 

I don't think Nikon is behind on the "Pro" lenses. I also think that most people mistake what pros have on thier cameras. You would be surprised at what you see if you follow PJs around.

 

I don't think Nikon makes a lens that is would not be of acceptable quality for any pro. Some may be less convenient but the quality is good enough. I use a 50 F1.8 to shoot boxing for publication. It is just right on the D2H from ringside and sharp as a tack even wide open. Is it a pro lens or a consumer lens? Can a pro lens cost $100.00? Fast tank like telephotos I am down with. On the short end...not so much.

Wow Matt! I have been photographing at least 5 rodeos per year for several years and that is an absolutely world-class shot. Stunning. Great job!

 

Bernard asked how the two lenses compared VR aside. IMO the 70-200 has a distinct advantage even without the VR. It focuses faster. Optically I would say that I can't see the difference. My first 5 years in pergatory will be for coveting the 80-200 2.8 when it was first released. I find it hard to fault this lens. If you are not routinely using the vr you can enjoy some real savings buying the 80-200. And it is lighter. It is also half the price. Having said that I would hate to have to give up the 70-200.

Apologies if this is an old subject. I am curious as to the opinion of the

sages here regarding the advantages VR might have over a monopod. Obviously

hand holding may be an advantage. I have the 70-200 VR and 80-200 2.8. I

don't see much advantage to the VR when a monopod is possible. Thoughts?

An unscientific observation.

 

I think the Canon Juggernaut with pro's is a bit of a myth. At PAC-10 football and basketball I see about an even split. Maybe even a few more Nikons. At one game I counted white lenses and they were in a slight minority. I covered one U of A/UCLA football game and a decided advantage to Nikon with the working press. Freelancers maybe more Canons.

 

When I talk to my fellow shooters on the sidelines there is very little parochialism. Almost everyone says they just stayed with the camera with which they were familiar. Its hard to remember that we just disassembeled the darkroom at the paper three years ago. Only went mostly digital about 5 years ago.

 

I know a busy and productive generalist doing 90% of hiw work on a D2H with a D300 as his back-up.

I'll just join in with everyone else. Cameta is great and I have bought several of thier demos. Got all of the books and accessories as well as flawless cameras/lenses.

Come on Matt. I can post hundreds of videos of everything from cologne to hairspray burning like crazy. I am not convinced this is about the extremely unlikely event that a couple of batteries may short and cause a cargo fire.

 

Read this nonsense...""Doing something as simple as keeping a spare battery in its original retail packaging or a plastic zip-lock bag will prevent unintentional short-circuiting and fires," said Krista Edwards, Deputy Administrator of the U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.

 

Lithium batteries are considered hazardous materials because they can overheat and ignite in certain conditions. Safety testing conducted by the FAA found that current aircraft cargo fire suppression system would not be capable of suppressing a fire if a shipment of non-rechargeable lithium batteries were ignited in flight."

 

Lithium batteries as freight have been banned from commercial flights since 2004 BTW.

 

Now read this:

 

New Lithium Battery Rules for U.S. Airplanes

Starting in 2008, there are new rules for bringing lithium batteries on airplanes:

 

The following quantity limits apply to both your spare and installed batteries. The limits are expressed in grams of "equivalent lithium content." 8 grams of equivalent lithium content is approximately 100 watt-hours. 25 grams is approximately 300 watt-hours:

Under the new rules, you can bring batteries with up to 8-gram equivalent lithium content. All lithium ion batteries in cell phones are below 8 gram equivalent lithium content. Nearly all laptop computers also are below this quantity threshold.

 

You can also bring up to two spare batteries with an aggregate equivalent lithium content of up to 25 grams, in addition to any batteries that fall below the 8-gram threshold. Examples of two types of lithium ion batteries with equivalent lithium content over 8 grams but below 25 are shown below.

 

 

For a lithium metal battery, whether installed in a device or carried as a spare, the limit on lithium content is 2 grams of lithium metal per battery.

 

 

"Almost all consumer-type lithium metal batteries are below 2 grams of lithium metal. But if you are unsure, contact the manufacturer!

 

Near as I can tell, this affects pretty much no one except audio/visual professionals. And the TSA isn't saying whether this is a safety issue or a security issue. They aren't giving any reason."

I am concerned that they are selling you Nichole and not the customers. I am a big fan of marketing ideas and advertizing but the bottom line is that people are sold one at a time. Many of the most experienced salespeople I know are frankly not very good. They know all of the terms but they don't do the selling when the chips are down. Personally listen to what they say. Be brutal.

 

Selling is best done in person. If they are not scheduled for an actual shoot they should be prospecting. Have you called all of the pre-schools and offered a discount to people they refer? Have you explained to large employers that their employees could have discounts and that this simply adds to the benefits their employees have?

 

You asked a loaded question. "How do I encourage them to have fun and enjoy shooting pirtures?" That is not thier problem. They will have fun when they are making money. Now is the time for gritting your collective teeth and working hard as hell and long as hell. Smile and relax with the clients but run like hell after that. Work from 8 AM to 8 PM. Anytime during those hours when y'all are not talking to a client or prospective client is wasted time.

 

Forget dumping the franchise. They can help a little and gaining the few percent that they cost is not going to save their business. That is simply a distraction. Time to work, work, work.

A little gentle subtrafuge.

 

I always have one or more young people who wish to assist/apprentice in exchange for a learning situation. When a friend asks for a deal it goes something like this. "Wow. We can help each other out. I have this great apprentice I am working with. If you would let her take your shots that would be a great help to me. And it would be good for you too becuase her sessions are half the price of mine. Besides. You and I have known each other for years. It would be good to get someone with a more objective eye involved. Don't worry. I will supervise without intruding"

 

No apprentice? "I'd love to take your picutes. We can help each other out too. I have this new lab I want to check out. Let me send your pictures to them and I will let you have them for half price. You will have to be flexible on your times as you know this is my busiest season but what the hell. Half price is a smokin' deal."

 

When it comes to relatives? Its my pleasure to photograph my family. As I have gotten older I have come to realize that they ain't going to be around forever. And neither am I.

Very first thing. Look them both in the eye and ask them this. Your advertizing is designed to bring in people. What I want to know is how the people who come in are being treated now. They may have access to enough clients but they may be doing a poor job of selling. I am not talking about brochures, signage, decorating, advertizing or samples. I want to know what words they are saying to the people they have. I want to them to tell me why it is super fun for a client to have their pictues taken. So.

 

When someone comes to me for a portrait or for kid stuff I want it to me like a spa day. I want them to have refreshments. I want them to be able to sit down and talk with me after each wardrobe change. After every 10 minutes of shooting I want them to have coffee or water or just a nice chat. I want to tell them how well they are doing. I want them to see my personal excitement in our mutual project. I want the place to be spotless. The bathrooms/changing rooms to be virtually sterile and very well lit. I want them to be able to sit down to put on thier makeup.

 

Two scarey things. You mentioned a franchise. What is that doing for them? Are they stuck in a style or sales process. If so they may well want to drop that.

 

Secondly you said they were trying to be a bit more upscale. What money buys is personalized service. Do they have a wide range of products? Do they offer the services of a styleist and hairdresser?

 

Have they called the local spas and offered a package that includes photography at the end of a makeover day? On and on.

 

Here is the deal. I can't tell you why people buy but I can tell you why they don't buy. They are either not aware of their problem or opportunity or they are not sufficiently disturbed or excited by it. What do they do to excite the clients? What this means to you (and your friends) is that the clients they come in contact with do not see the value in what they are selling. Portraiture is about self image. (No pun intended.) The client should feel important from the moment they have anything to do with the studio. Fawn over them. Smile, compliment and carress them starting on the phone when they make the appointment.

 

My guess is that they are cordial, efficient and professional. That is just the opposite of what they should be. They should be fun, enthuiastic and very touchy-feely.

 

Think of it this way Nichole. If you were coming to my studio to model for me how would you feel? Self-conscience? Exposed? Apprehensive about what the experience would be like? Maybe a bit embarrassed? Afraid I might ask you to do something you don't want to do? Your job is to make evey potential customer feel completely relaxed.

 

The objection I hear most frequently from prospective clients is "Oh I just don't photograph well. I never look good in pictures". I love it when people say this to me.....It is so easy to then say.....Really? I'm surprised. But if that has been your experience that is the very reason you SHOULD partner with me. I have years of experience photographing people of all flavors and I pride myself in remaining very committed to every one of my friends and clients...which means to you that togeather we can discover the look that you will be proud of and will want to share with your friends and family... and the real benefit to you is that you will not have to worry about poor results. You will be able to relax, be natural, have fun and leave the hard stuff to me. And that is what you really want isn't it? A fun day with no pressure that ends with a beautiful portrait that you can't wait to give to your friends and family and that will represent you for generations.

 

See what I mean? Sounds corny? Master selling and you and your friends will get rich. Think of the client first, last and always and you can't loose.

 

BTW. You don't need to go door to door. Get into your old client files and call every one of them with a special offer. You know Mrs. Jones, we have not updated your family portrait in 3 years....I was just noticing Mrs. Rodrigues, it is just about time to get your daughters starting school pictures. She will only start kindergarten once. I was just noticing Mr. Smith that we haven't updated your executive portraits in two years.

 

Get a good book on selling and make them read it cover to cover. NOT marketing. SELLING. 'Cause that is what will save their collective behinds.

 

Excellent. I think I may just make that my next trip.

 

Thanks

What tripe. All of this nonsense because we won't make the hard decisions and go after terrorists in a meaningful way.

 

These bozos they are hiring couldn't, for the most part, spell Lithium. (Those who are not taking it anyway.)

 

No offense to the TSA but they repeatedly fail their own security inspections. Maybe they should ban old ladies from the planes. Let one stiffen up and she makes a jim-crack battering ram.

I think the critique forums here could not be as demanding (and sometimes disappointing) as the comments of a photo editor. Today I had a rather large portrait I took on the front page of the paper. I liked it, the editor liked it and I had two favorable and two unfavorable emails before noon. I haven't checked since. My point is that professionals get critiqued every day. People either buy the photos or they don't. Editors print them or they don't.

 

The opportunity to post for critique here is a great learning tool. By and large photos here are rated to highly IMO. This is not to be mean but to give someone 5/5 is high praise indeed from some here. Just look at the "competition". Take a look at Colin's (Carron) wonderful portfolio. His unique view, attention to composition, depth of subject matter and marvelous post production will give you an idea of the level of work here. There is one picture I would rate as low as 5/5. Virtually all of the rest higher and some much highter than that. But I will bet that he could find quite a few 3/3's in his archives. He just doesn't put them online.

 

I don't post photos here for critiue. I find I learn much more looking at the work of others. I find it easier to learn from a photo in which I do not have a personal investment. What I get here is inspiration and an eye tune-up.

 

Don't worry about the 3/3's. Look at the 6/6+ and ask yourself how you would go about making that photograph.

I have shot that many doing sports or fashion. Its embarrassing to think I cull through all of those to get just the right shot. I think we have set the bar higher for ourselves. Many of the ones we delete would get used if we shot in film.

 

I shot boxing last year with an old Speed Graphic. What a gas. Taught me a hell of a lesson. I intend to do it at least once every year.

I had my 80-200 f2.8 fixed, (frozen zoom) for about $150.00. Nikon did a good job and I got it back in about three weeks.

 

Having said that. If the repairs are expensive take a lool at the 18-70. It is a super lens for not much money.

I'm jumping on Eric's bandwagon. You can be a fine photographer and be unable to draw a bath. This is an example of the arrogance of the pedagogue. It also points to another problem.

 

Why is it that photography is treated as the bastard child of the art department? Photography should be taken seriously and idiotic pronouncements like "cant draw or paint then I will never make it in photography because I have no artistic talent at all" point out the failures of this professor and not you. I would run from this pissant as fast as I can. Because of the arrogance of most college professors it is unlikely that an approach to the department head will do you any good.

 

Why not go to a school that actually values photography? The Center for Digital Imaging Arts at Boston University, Brooks, University of Arizona Center for creative Photography. If I were you I would get myself off to the Academy of Art University in San Francisco. You will be respected as a photographer and taught by artists.

 

Consider. Annie Leibovitz - San Francisco Art Institute. Alfred Eisenstaedt Belt and button salesman and freelancer for a newspaper. Anne Geddes - Self taught. Dorothea Lange - Apprenticed in NYC. Frans Lanting - Masters in Environmental Economics. David Hamilton - Graphic designer. On and on.

 

I think getting a degree is wonderful. If you want to be a successfull photographer get a business degree, aprentice yourself to a superstar photographer, and have fun. A BFA is nice. It will teach you many fun skills. Among them writing an artists statement that will make people want to hit you with a wet sock.

 

I am concerned about your "the only school I can attend" remark. Be resourcefull. Starve. Work long hours. Go where you will be respected as a photographer and not treated as a second class citizen by some shavants like this guy.

I know a few who are exclusively film. I use Medium format sometimes but I admit it is out of nostalgia more than necessity.

 

I use slide film for artwork as many galleries still ask for it for art entries. Occasionally a customer will ask for film. They never have a good reason but they do it anyway.

 

I would use film if I were photographing a wedding outdoors in direct sunlight. This may be a personal failure but what the heck.

Borrow a SB-600 or SB-800. Bounce it for fun. If they won't let you use a tripod maybe they will let you use a monopod. If these are pictures for you to use for fun and not for profit, shoot at 400-800 ISO if you can't use the flas...

 

Wright is known for quirky details. Photograph these. Instead of trying for an entire room look for the vistas that turn you on and capture them. A fireplace. Floor covering. View out a window.

 

Use what you have and do everything to make it pleasing to you. And don't get so busy trying to take pictures that you miss the wonderful opportunity see this great place.

Sometimes a photo forces objectivity in the observer.