michael mccann

<p>I was working this evening using NIK plugins extensively while experimenting and my machine started glitching quite badly. So I guess my 64 bit NIK plugins are not working as well as I thought.</p>

<p>I was working this evening using NIK plugins extensively while experimenting and my machine started glitching quite badly. So I guess my 64 bit NIK plugins are not working as well as I thought.</p>

I have 12gb ram. Maybe I have enough that it does't matter. I am glad NIK is addressing a fix. It's great software.

Odd- I have running all of the Nik plugins extensively since they went 64bit on my Mac and have had no issues

whatsoever. I wonder whats going on.

<p>Vuescan works perfectly with 10.6.6 and the Minolta 5400.</p>

<p>If you installed them as 64 bit and your PS is 32 bit, they will not show. </p>

<p>Deleted double post.</p>

<p>On my Mac, I just use Vuescan. Install and use.</p>

<p>I am running CS5 on Snow Leopard with all of Niks 64 bit plugins with no problems whatsoever.<br>

I wish I could help you, but the software is working great for me. I'm just telling you this so you know that just possibly its not the software.</p>

<p>My 2200 works perfectly with 10.6 using the newest drivers from Epson.</p>

<p>Marios, all of Niks plugins are 64 bit.</p>

<p>I own a copy of that lens and have tested it on my D90. It is just not sharp enough compared to any of my modern lenses.</p>

<p>Why are you not importing them using iPhoto? Could not be simpler.</p>

<p>I recently shot a concert with a Canon S90 at iso 800. Noisiest images I have ever taken.</p>

<p>How could any manufacturer design any lens if the sensors of cameras were located at different distances. I'm not being rude, but the question makes no technical sense at all.</p>

<p>Try shooting downwind of thermal features in Yellowstone Park during high winds and you will use filters. My experience ruined an expensive polarizer, not a lens before I realized what was happening. As mentioned above use according to conditions or not, whatever works for you.</p>

<p>

<p ><a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=1836228">Mike Earussi</a> </p>

 

<p >It's brand new and not yet released so nobody knows anything about it yet, we're just hoping it's better than the original.</p>

<p > I think the 10-20 I have had for the last year is an exceptional lens, so if this one is "better" is will be spectacular.</p>

 

</p>

<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=1836228">Mike Earussi</a><br>

It's brand new and not yet released so nobody knows anything about it yet, we're just hoping it's better than the original.<br>

I think the 10-20 I have had for the last year is an exceptional lens, so if this one is "better" is will be spectacular.</p>

 

<p>Keep in mind that Yellowstone, our nations oldest National Park is definitely not over-rated.</p>

<p>I think the images are exceptional. I for one am impressed.</p>

<p>The Epson 2200P driver is on the 10.5 install DVD and it works fine Photoshop CS3. </p>

<p>Download the OS 10.4 driver. It works. Then download all the paper profiles from epson and any others you may use. The 10.5 easy print is worthless.</p>

We had cloud cover- I had been looking forward to this. Thanks for posting the images.

My 10-20 Sigma is extremely sharp. End of the story for me.

I've only purchased two Sigma lenses, both in the last year. A 10-20 and a 18-200 OS.

Both have performed flawlessly. My Co-Worker has the 10-20, 30, and the 50-150

Sigmas, which perform flawlessly. Thats 5 out of 5- hardly what I call a high failure

rate.