hal_edmonds
-
Posts
125 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by hal_edmonds
-
-
<p>I'd go for a D50 with a 18-200. I venture to say you can get both used around 700.00.</p>
-
<p>Am I missing something? I put my questionable shots on a disk. Is this not a good idea?<br>
Hal</p>
-
<p>You mentioned a daily lens that takes about everything! There is only one on your list and it's the 18-200. It makes my cheapo D50 give great results..Hal</p>
-
<p>If one loves film so much, one should love processing as much. Having been in the processing business I would not trust todays processors one bit. Even though they have marvelous equipment they have to rely on technical ability and caring staff and there is where todays labs fail. Time envolved with you doing your own processing is not the problem it's laziness. I always processed my film, picked the best frames and sent off to a pro lab until I bought my own enlarger. That's the way things were done in the 50's. I sold my labs because of burn out and the coming digital revolution. Now I shoot 100% digital and say "to hell with film".</p>
-
<p>Mike and Bruce, thanx for the info..Looking at birdingworld pix has sold me. I can't believe the clarity of this lens even hand held. Personnally, I will always use a tripod because of my age and weakening hands. Hal</p>
-
<p>With a $875.00 sale price I'm tempted to pop for this lens. However, I live way out in the country and doubt the nearest town camera dealers carry this lens, so I will have to buy sight unseen through the internet. My question is, does anyone own this lense, or has anyone used this lense? What are it's short comings, ect? It'll be paired to my D 50.. Thanks you for your help..Hal</p>
-
<p>The 18 - 200mm is a suberb lens. With the D 90 you'd have a great combo....Hal</p>
-
<p>It sounds to me that this is a month long trip. How can you possibly see everything along the way to your main spots. I know, I just came back from a 5500 mile trip in one month and still missed a lot. Wish I had better planned instead of being so rushed........Hal</p>
-
<p>That'a boy Keith!!!!!</p>
-
<p>Great photo Bill. Very pro looking..Hal</p>
-
<p>Photogs should always look photographically professional regardless of assignment. We must always dress conservative to maintain dignity to our profession. I'm proud to be a photog and am looked upon as a leader in my community. I realize that there will always be some who don't agree, but that is their business. As far as weddings are concerned, they are considered by most to be a sacred ceremony and if the b&g are dressed formally their photog should be full dressed. Ties have never got in my way. Photogs, like bankers, doctors, lawyers, ect. should always keep their stature in the business world..............</p>
-
<p>Since I used Olympus(film) in my studios I wanted to get Olympus when digital came about. But due to a completely new camera I didn't want to wait so I bought Nikon. It's alright but I'm going to go Olympus in the near future. They have great glass and feel so good in my hands. I don't know why Olympus is not accepted more than it is.</p>
-
<p>I worked with them one summer to help a friend manager. They were no fun to work for. Greed was put ahead of service and quality. Sell, sell, sell, push, push, push the customer until they bought or left the store pissed off. Their downfall also was the purchasing of Ritz's cousins chain named Wolfe Photo.</p>
-
<p>Cindy, I live 75 miles from Jellystone and from my experience I have never found a need for less than 18mm but a need for more reach. My YNP lens is a 18-200 like yours. I get very sharp results. But you'll find a need for at least 400mm. I'm planning on a 200-400 in the next few months. YNP can be dusty so you wont want to change lenses too often unless you have a changing bag. I use a tripod for almost all my shots.</p>
-
<p>I would not tolerate such nonsense. It was ethically and morally insane. She was only thinking of herself and not her employer. What audacity!</p>
-
<p>If you really care about your archi photography then do it right, get yourself a 4x5 view with a 120/220 back. You'll love the results... Of course it takes time and is not the way to go if your lazy.</p>
-
<p>I recommend having four times your yearly living costs in reserve. Lack of capital is the #1 reason for business failures.</p>
-
<p>Eli, listen up!<br>
When I was 16 I shot with a Box Brownie. You're very lucky to own a D40. What you have as far as lens is concerned, keep them. Master what they are capable of doing for you. 18 to 200 is nothing to sneer about. They're great lenses!</p>
-
<p>Maybe just a thought. Why do some people spend thousands and thousands on wonderful well built camera bodies only to attach to them mickey mouse lenses? I know that this is not going to set well with a lot of you, but cheap is cheap. I for one have tried all brands at one time or another with sad results. At present I own a Kenko Teleplus2X that's a piece a junk that destroys the image quality of my Nikkor 18-200 VR which is sharp as a tack. As soon as I'm able I'm getting a Nikkor TC. Really, it likens to buying a Cadillac and putting a Fiat engine in it.</p>
-
<p>You don't want to know what I think!</p>
-
<p>What you are discussing here is what we called (50 years ago) "circles of confusion". Seems like we're still confused.</p>
-
<p>Go with the 18-200 it's one hell of a lens... Hal</p>
-
<p>Oh, I forgot the 10 pound wood tripod.</p>
-
<p>1 Speed Graphic<br>
Dz. 4X5 film holders<br>
1 Grafmatic Back<br>
Stobinar wet battery pack<br>
Bunch of loose flash bulbs<br>
Portable studio setup<br>
You youngin's have it made...</p>
Wedding photographers appearance
in Wedding & Event
Posted