anthonyposton

<p>I would not put a lot of faith in this rating system, it is not very accurate.</p>

<p>To answer the first post here, I will be using an outsource of high quality primarily for portrait work. I will use them for Landscape and Nature work as well though. I noticed the photographer that I mentioned above prints a lot of work onto what looks like a thin wooden panel. Collages are something she does that people really seem to gobble up.<br>

A collage on a the thin board material, with about ten pictures on it. The full size of the panel is about an 8x10". I also need the printer to be able to do picture to canvas as well...<br>

Thank you Bill and Michael I will check into all of these companies and probably try them...<br>

Thanks<br>

Anthony Poston</p>

<p>Looking into printing my images I find so many choices, I have seen prints from a local photographer from the area. She shoots portraits only but, she will not reveal her printing source, though I know she does not do it herself. I need to find a good quality company to send my images to. I need a professional look in my prints. I feel that I would be better off to send off my prints than to buy all the printing equiptment that will soon be outdated. Can anyone help with this?</p>

<p>Here is one I shot from a recent hike, it was about a three mile hike, one of which was almost straight down. Not too bad going in but, coming out, well thats a different story.</p><div></div>

<p>Nice find Chris...One I would love to see in person...Anthony</p>

<p>Picture did not upload try it again!</p><div></div>

<p>Trying to steal my french fries...</p>

<p>Thanks everyone for the input, it helps a lot. Thank you Paul for the link as well. I am sure I am being a little impatient with my experience too. It is already getting better, I just need more time with the camera in hand, practicing. Thank again...Anthony</p>

<p>Thanks Chris,<br>

Richard awesome work!</p>

<p>Another one...</p><div></div>

<p>I am shooting in Manual, Raw and Jpeg. The tone curve does look alright on some of the shots, but they do look under on the screen. They are usually under on the computer screen though. The blue is hitting high on the left side of almost all the shots. I have adjusted the WB and also adjusted the Dynamic Range in levels. But, you are right to the fact that some of the shots are not showing to under in the historiagram.</p>

<p>I think if you are willing to learn how to use your equiptment properly you will not be disappointed with any camera. Out of the box a Sony camera will not disappoint a newbie or a veteran alike. If your buying your equiptment off of ebay on the other hand you will more than likely be disappointed. Cannon makes a great camera, but junk for those cameras are all over ebay as well. <br>

If you are impatient, you will be disappointed with any camera you choose when it comes to an SLR.</p>

Thank you

<p>My file size must be a bit too large...What size are the ones above? Typically?</p>

<p>One I took today!</p><div></div>

<p>I recently upgraded from an a200 to an a700. I was very pleased with the performance of my a2oo but, I felt I was ready to move up to another level in photography. I am very pleased with my close up shots, the detail is very good. I am having problems adjusting to the difference in exposure. Outside in higher light situations I seemed to be able to shoot a lot higher apeture value in and maintain a correct exposure. The a700 I find myself opening my F-stop values more to grab enough light. I have went up on my ISO and this helps but, I feel as though I am missing something somewhere. Any answers would be great on this topic....Thank you Anthony Poston</p>

<p>Great Shots Tony!</p>

<p>I own both of these lenses, and the kit 18-70mm which is a great lens. You will be happy with your choice. I am in the process of upgrading to the a700 but, I am going to keep my a200 it is a great camera. For the money I feel you are getting the better product with SONY.<br>

You will be very pleased with the 70-300mm performance....</p>

<p>Yeah I think the reviews are in on the 350, the resolution is very high quality. I have made my choice and it is an a700...Should be in the mail as we speak. Thanks all of you for helping me make the right choice for me. Now just getting it in my hands and learning it. I was stuck on these cameras but, all of your input really helped a lot. Kevin you are correct in the fact of ISO output, my current camera and a200 does not stand up and deliver in a higher ISO when needed. But, the smaller versions of the Nikon do not really either. I agree that Nikon makes great equiptment, but for me SONY is the only way to go....Thanks again to all that contributed....AP</p>

<p>Your just paying for a name more than anything....</p>

<p>One other little thing I would like to add to the above, Nikon uses Sony sensors in some of their DSLR Cameras.</p>

<p>I shoot almost all of my photos at 100 ISO, very rarely 200, never higher. So ISO seems nominal to me. As far as Sony goes quality is their business. Compared to Nikon, their is no comparison in quality of product. I am not down on Nikon, they make great cameras no doubt. I know two other people who bought Nik cameras at the same time I bought a Sony.<br>

Within the first month, one of them had to return the entire camera because it quit working all together. The other has had problems as well. Now they both are having nitches and have had to return them for repairs. Both camera are less than a year old.<br>

This could be an isolated incident.<br>

With my current camera I am producing better quality images than a D300, a D50, and a D40. This is; I'm sure partly user based, but I have not had the problems with my camera they have had.<br>

I am investing my money in quality, and after deep study. Sony is the answer for me...<br>

Don't take that the wrong way but, I know Nikon makes great lenses, and good cameras. I do not think the quality of product from Nikon is at the same level Sony produces.</p>

<p>Thank you all for the comments, links and information. That is what I was hoping for. The 700 appears to be the more likely choice. But I have to ask myself, if I am going to continue this way seriously shouldn't I go to the top of the line with the 900? This way my ability will be my only obstacle and not my equiptment? Thanks Again! Anthony</p>

<p>I have done a lot of research on both of these cameras. I am poised to by another camera in the near future. I am just wondering if anyone could tell me from experience the better choice. The higher resolution of the a350 is very appealing to me. The 700 is suppose to be the professional version.<br>

Which is better? I can see some obvious differences in the specs of them. But when it down to picture quality, how can the 700 produce a better image than the 14.4 mp 350?</p>

<p>I use only Sony cameras, I am not an advocate of any camera in general, but with that in mind. I believe you will be very happy with the a200's performance under most if not all circumstances. In comparision with two of my co-workers who both use a Nikon; mine holds its own quiet well. That is against a D40 and a D300 believe it or not! With macro your lense choice will be your main issue....</p>