rjacksonphoto

<p>If you can afford it, the 17-55 f2.8 would be your best bet. I don't think an effective focal length of 36mm (if you go with the 24-70) will be wide enough if space is tight. You could consider the 16-85 f/3.5-5.6 as a good, all-around lens but would likely be pretty dependent on your flash for an indoor event. <br>

Oh, just noticed you are renting. In that case, definitely the 17-55.</p>

<p>I agree, you should consider what it is you want to do with a new lens that your current lens won't do. That said, I think the Nikkor 16-85 f/3.5-5.6 is the perfect single lens solution for the DX bodies. It would give you a little more focal length range.</p>

<p>How likely is it you'll buy one of the smaller, lighter DX bodies, such as the D3200 or D5300? They make great travel bodies. In that case, the 17-55 would make a great combination. If it is unlikely you would ever go that route, I'd sell it.</p>

<p>Another vote for the Vivitar Series 1 28-105mm f/2.8-3.8. Bought one used for my FG back around 1989 and found it to be an excellent, well-built performer.</p>

It's currently mounted on my D800 instead of my 17-35mm AFS-- because of its compact size. I agree with the others

here. Solid performer, adequate wide open if absolute sharpness isn't critical.

<p>I hope Travis is just yanking our chain, here. I mean, seriously, do grown men really ask such questions? And of strangers? I think you guys have been had!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Well the lens may indeed be worth 2200 -but- anyone contemplating spending that much on a lens should necessarily ask themselves if the lens will be used to make money with. If the answer is no, then probably it is not a wise purchase.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>From a business standpoint, sure. However, not everything can or should be based upon purely financial considerations.</p>

<blockquote>

 

</blockquote>

<p><em>I have considered doing a contract photographer approach and charge a flat fee and the pictures are yours for $350.00 a hour. </em></p>

<p>Is this just to hand over the images on a disc, without processing? Because, if it is, I'm shocked. Are people really willing to pay someone $350 an hour just to take photos? I think it's time to close down the ol' internal medicine practice, if that's the case.<em><br /></em></p>

<p>D5000 with Nikkor AF-S 35mm f/1.8G DX, Canon SD780 IS. The bag's an Osprey Float.</p>

<p>Gotta agree with Bob Keefer. If it's my wedding, I'd prefer the sick photographer keep his/her viruses at home and send a backup.</p>

<p>Close the mouth, open the eyes, and bring the hair down. Voila! Seriously though, I hope the groom doesn't find this thread. And not a bad looking guy, anyway.</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks to Jose, Matt, and Shun for an excellent forum all around. Merry Christmas!</p>

<p>I avoid the thin filters if possible because of the inability to use the lens cap (sometimes you need to leave the filter on for a day or so, so it is inconvenient to keep taking it off after each shot). I find the press on caps that come with the filters don't stay on and often end up lost. The hood hats are a good idea. Funny, I own three or four that I use to cushion lenses when I use a non-padded bag but, somehow, forgot to try them for their intended use!</p>

<p>Recently purchased a D5000 with the 35mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.4 AF-S lenses for a mountain bike trip. Coupled with my 12-24mm Nikkor, nice, fairly small package. Viewfinder is not as nice as the D300 but certainly not a deal breaker. Kind of like the difference between the F5 and the FM2n for a glasses wearer (which I am)-- and it didn't stop me from loving the FM2n. I really like the small size and the fact that I can set aperture-priority, turn the LCD around to protect it, and shoot this like an F3. I'm really digging this little camera!</p>

<p>I don't think you would save that much in size and weight between a D90 and a D300. The D5000 is a noticeable difference from the D300.</p>

<p>I've gotten great deals on Ebay. Only got an item that was not as advertised twice, one handled well by the seller and and one not. Probably purchased 90 to 100 items. I've also sold some high end items at really good prices, like a Canon XHA1 and a Hasselblad 501CM. Both were in superb condition and the buyer got an excellent deal on each of them. You just have to know what you are buying and look for good feedback, descriptions, etc.</p>

<p>I use multi-coated-- usually B+W or Hoya-- UV filters on all of my lenses. Photos seem to be OK. But then, I've never been accused of being particularly discriminating when it comes to image quality.</p>

<p>I guess I have to agree with Ilkka here. What <em>do</em> people do with 350 images of one event? And maybe wedding photography is different, but a 14% keeper rate is pretty good in my book. I'm just sayin'...</p>

<p>F3 or FM2n. But I haven't used any Leicas.</p>

<p>Yeah, the weight of the pack should be carried, primarily, <strong>by the hips and not the shoulders</strong> . This from the Osprey Packs, Inc. site:</p><p><strong>Step 2 - Hipbelt Sizing</strong><br>

To determine your hipbelt size measure around your hips, not your waist.<strong> <em>A properly fitted hipbelt rides centered over the hipbones and needs to be very snug; after all it will be carrying the bulk of the pack's weight.</em> </strong> The padded portion should wrap well around your hips, leaving a gap of 3 to 6 inches between the tips of the pads when securely tightened.</p><p>I added the bolding and italics.</p><p>I really like the Kata backpacks. I'm selling my Tamracs since I got the Katas.</p>

<p>Have also noticed pages slow to load.</p>

<p>While I understand reluctance to risk your best equipment, you also have to consider that a trip you "have long waited for" is also one on which you'd like to use your best equipment. You should a consider a valuable personal property insurance policy. I have one on all of the expensive equipment I have and it is very reasonable, around $18-$20 US per month.</p>

<p>If you were in continuous focus mode and tried to focus on her eye and then recompose with the shutter release half-pressed, the camera would have shifted focus to the central part of the image at the time you fully depressed the shutter release (if you were using the central focus sensor). That would have placed the focus point around the button hole on the red collar-- roughly where focus seems to be. I think it was the inadvertant switch to continuous focus mode that caused the problem.</p>

<p>As far as Kata quality is concerned, I'm selling my Tamrac backpacks in favor of the Katas I now own. Excellent quality and ergonomics.</p>

<p>Sven, if you go the 35mm route, you should get the f/2.0 AF-D version so you can use it on your FM2. I went to Paris once with just an FM2n, a 24mm f/2.8 and a 50mm f/1.4. Light, mobile kit and got plenty of nice photos.</p>

<p>I think they look great for a beginner. I also think my wife and I would be very happy with your work. The wine glass in front of the face should definitely be pulled. Bottom line, what did the clients think?</p>