mark_loader

Hi,friends...i enjoy reading photo mags and have noticed a disturbing trend lately- the amount of articles and

letters outlining bad experiences whilst out shooting. Here's an example from my neck of the woods (Western

Australia)...a man was in his own backyard trying his new camera. It was pointed at the local park ,amongst other

directions, and within 30 minutes the police were knocking on his door responding to complaints that he was

"perving" on children. To say that he was shocked, outraged and traumatised would not be an understatement. A

photographer in London, shooting the houses of parliament, was stopped and questioned- in public view- regarding

his "actions". Dozens of other snappers were ignored. His "error'? A DSLR and, worst of all, a TRIPOD. A woman on

a beach in England loudly criticised a photographer for taking pictures of children, including hers, "secretly".

Humiliated, the gentleman showed her the pics in his lcd which showed nothing more than the lighthouse on the

hill above the beach. I can take photos of my sons playing Australian Rules football or soccer, but if I pull out

my dslr at my daughter's netball game? In fact, i walked around that netball centre...there must have been about

30 games in progress...and you know what? Not one single camera! All those memories which should be re-lived

again and again just left on the courts. What the heck is going on? Anyone?

Pity...it would have been a SIGN...REPENT,ye Canonite!

Hi,John- William's nailed it for you here. Get the those jpegs right in-camera learning all the basics first before photoshopping, which should merely be the icing on the cake. Also read books, mags, visit websites and see what others are doing, especially those with the same gear as yours. Join a camera club, hang out with your photo buddies, take some short courses, and if possible find a good teacher/mentor. Just hang in there, mate, and you'll reap the rewards down the track...good luck.

If the panda and puke were Real (giveaway:no diced carrots) then it would be Performance Art, be displayed in a major gallery,garner accolades from the intelligentsia and artistic elite,and win a prestigious award. Any dissenters would be denounced for stifling the next stage of evolution.Or devolution. So there.

Hey,J.O'K.O....I won't be deleting your stuff...I may not agree with everything you say-e.g. if you were a pagan Canonite or something ghastly like that...but if I was to comment on your "nice camera" and you engaged me in friendly conversation and even inspired me to try new things with my photography wouldn't that be a great result for both of us? Maybe our grave new world considers mentoring to be old hat and un-PC. The behaviour of that "artist" to you as a teenager was reprehensible and told us more about her own problems and her inability to answer a simple kid's question. So you continue to put in your two cents worth- I look forward to it. Oh,and I notice you appear to be a bit of a loose cannon....I like that, I just hope you're not a pagan Canonite.

We could all try being humble and polite-"Thanks, it is a nice camera and i put in a lot of time and research before i bought it". Then we could patiently explain to them that we also put in a lot of time and research studying the art of photography and that is why they responded so favourably to the picture. Perhaps we could even encourage them to investigate photography for themselves so they too could enjoy the magic we do. We need to realise that when they comment on our "nice camera" they are really saying "Hey, great shot". Instead of abruptly shutting them out with a curt response, why don't we invite them in?

Hi, Linda-- I have a D80 and the one thing that impressed me about it (and other Nikons as well) that hasn't been mentioned yet, is the fact that it produces great jpegs straight out of the camera. A real bonus.

Hi, Karen- a top wedding photographer here in Oz uses a D200 with the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and the Nikkor 85 f1.8 and gets superb results. In fact the 85 is his favourite lens and his enthusiasm for it has encouraged many of his friends and students to purchase it as well....you may find it to be your live-in lens for portraits

So far no-one has mentioned the 70-200 f2.8 lenses by Sigma and Tamron- a whole lot cheaper than the gorgeous Nikon. Surely they are an option? And if getting a D300 = settling for "less" then life is grand in your neck of the woods!

Hi,guys...thinking about the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 for my Nikon D80- whaddya reckon? Here in Oz the Nikon equivalent

is three times as much so unfortunately it's out of the question. The Tamron has garnered promising reviews so

far, but have any of you folks tried/bought one?

Let me add one more thing: I,too, have wondered about the performance of my camera compared to the latest releases and all it did was lead to doubt and uncertainty. NOT a good place to be. Grab a great lens or two, go down to that glorious Irish coastline ( Giants Causeway perhaps?), take some great photos, upload them, and knock us all out. What are you waiting for?

Hi April- sorry to throw a spanner in the works, but a great wedding pro here in Australia uses 2 main lenses: a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and a Nikkor 85 f1.8. He swears by the 85 f1.8 and the results he gets certainly back this up. If you have your heart set on an 18-200, consider the Sigma version with Optical Stabiliser- much cheaper than the Nikon equivalent. Good to hear your business is doing well!

These guys have pretty much nailed it,Mark. No camera model seems to have a shelf life of longer than about 2 years. Like they say in "The Godfather" ITS JUST BUSINESS! I have never heard much in the way of complaints with this model- in fact the jpegs straight out of the camera are great, certainly superior to that OTHER brand ( i dont like to use the C word ). Why not check out some websites to see what results other D50 users are achieving? Don't lose sleep on it, boyo!

Hi,guys- apples vs oranges time!I have a D80 with a Sigma 24-70/2.8 and i am

thinking of something LIGHTER as a general purpose lens to complement it. The

obvious culprits are the Tamron 17-50/2.8 and the Sigma 18-50/2.8. Bruce

Margolis and Rob Shooter have spoken of this before so i hope you two can help

me out here. Any other opinions would also be very welcome-thanks

Consider the Sigma 18-200/os.Here in Australia it is considerably cheaper than the Nikon but performs really well