John Di Leo

Thanks, Joseph & Deiter, for the responses. I understand the functionality of it when shooting, but that is not what I am talking about. It's about when NOT shooting, ie walking along just carrying the Z. I felt it poking into my thumb--so a "comfort issue"-- and I am asking if inadvertently pressing it can change a setting that must be undone before shooting, thus slowing you down and potentially missing shots? For example, pressing in on that textured button...doesn't that lock focus and or exposure, or moves the focus point, etc? If I carry the camera at my side like a gun, turned on and ready to shoot, could inadvertent pressing that button just from holding the camera at my side cause exposure and focus to lock, or move the focus point far to the side, and when I lift the camera to shoot I have to "unlock" that inadvertent button press to get the camera to focus and set exposure? That is my question. I only played with the Z 7ii for about 10 minutes, so maybe I was misreading it, but in that 10 minutes I knew I didn't like that button pressing into my thumb. I like to have the camera ready to go, so that I can lift and shoot immediately; if my thumb, because it rests on that button, changes a setting that, if unnoticed would create focus and exposure issue...that would not be good. In a studio, or if one uses a neck strap, that would not be a problem, but that is NOT how I am shooting. Have you found that to be an issue at all? Is that a potential problem in your experience?

Hi, Sanford, I agree. I wish the regular Nikon rep was there--see my other posting The button is the "sub-selector," whatever that is

I was at B&H recently and went to the Nikon kiosk to visit and chat with Gerry R, the Nikon rep. When in NYC I try to visit Gerry and talk all things Nikon. Unfortunately, Gerry was not there. I was there on his day off, so I started talking to the replacement Nikon rep. He was friendly enough, but I was very surprised by what he was saying. I told him I was thinking about trading in my d810 and, grinning, I said what I was really interested in was the "Z 8, though the Z 7ii was interesting esp with the reports of the new firmware upgrade." There was a display Z6 with the battery pack and I could see that that size factor---similar to a Z9 in footprint, was just too big. I know the Z 8 does not yet exist. I know it may never exist, however the rumor mill has in the Z8 a really attractive package, but his response really surprised me, especially by someone who was supposed to be representing Nikon, the face of Nikon at B&H. At the very least it is certainly "chat-worthy" with a customer. Emphatically he told me, " It doesn't exist, it is nowhere, it doesn't exist, it is vapor and I have no idea if it will ever exist. We never know what Nikon is doing. One day things show up. " He made me sorry I even approached the subject, almost foolish for doing so. He then continued on, as I was playing with the Z 7ii, saying that "Nikon will not make it if the Z 9 isn't successful, [that] Nikon is betting the farm on the Z 9." He said that a few times. I pointed out that pre-orders are through the roof (2000+ at B&H; 1000+ at Adorama--their numbers) and the reviews of the Z 9 are universally glowing. Didn't matter. He went on to say that "Sony is where it's at right now." And "You know what Sony has? Sony has billions [of dollars], Canon has millions, you know what Nikon has? Maybe thousands." He was so down on Nikon and its future that in effect he was making business for Sony and Canon, both on the quality and liquidity of the companies and their technology. Here I was, a customer, standing there with a 7 year old camera, a confirmed Nikon user, suggesting I could trade (today) for a Z 7ii, and he was bad mouthing Nikon to the extent that anyone hearing him would conclude that it would be foolish to buy Nikon. I was truly surprised. I thanked him and then went over to the Sony Kiosk--he talked me into it, and played with a A7 rIV. I liked the feel of the body and the reps were helpful, but having had to deal with the awful menu structure of my Sony RX100ii, I knew I couldn't live with that menu structure. I decided I would just keep my trusty d810 for now. I'm not really sure why I'm reporting this except maybe to vent, but man, Nikon! With friends like this who needs enemies.

I was recently at B&H and got to handle the Z 7ii. I had my d810 with me. In short I was disappointed by the "feel" of the camera when not shooting. My digital progression has been d200, d700, d810 and in all of those cameras the body just fit my hand. They felt familiar and comfortable. That comfortable feel has kept my with Nikon for many decades. The Z7ii is smaller and I expected a bit of an acceptable different feel, but what "stuck out" was the textured joystick button between the "AF-ON" button and the "i " button. Pun intended. It really seemed to stick out. A lot. I could feel the texture at the base of my thumb. I'm not sure what this button does and cursory web search does not help out, moves focus point maybe? When I am walking with my camera I carry it with a wrist strap and hold it down by my side, fingers around the grip in the front and thumb across the upper third of the back. It hangs at the end of my arm. Holding the Z 7ii that way had that button sticking into the base of my thumb in kind of an annoying way ergonomically and with enough pressure that I fear my thumb could be changing whatever setting that button controls, maybe adding a step to undo when I pull the camera to my eye to shoot. I shoot a lot of street and quick action, for example Mardi Gras Does anyone else have this comfort issue; does it happen that the button is accidentally engaged to change settings? Have you changed your grip? I will quickly add that when I put the camera to my eye my thumb falls right on that button as I am sure it was designed to do. Any info appreciated and TIA

YMMV, but some of the most interesting negatives I came across were from my wife's parents, when she was a child in the early 50s. 120s, 127s, 110s, I also have the prints from my grandfather dating back to the 1920s and sl before. Yes, they can sit a while before the spirit moves you and you have the considerable time needed, but in my experience it was well worth it. I would recommend you look at those old negatives. They really don't blossom until you've converted them to positives. You could be very surprised and pleased.

Not the frames, but each sheet bears the exact same name as the folder of the digitized copies. If I am looking for a particular image I just need to find it in the particular sheet of negatives and look for the image. I don't think it will be that hard, if I ever go looking for one. I was thinking about numbering the sheets, but thought that would be redundant since the names of folders and sheets match exactly. When a contact sheet exists I file it right behind the negative sleeve. Many times I had 5x5 proofs instead of contact sheets and I have those stored in plastic sleeves behind the corresponding negatives. I am using multiple binders that are specific for particular images, eg "Family," "France," "Italy," etc. Some binders are bigger than others and I may sub-divide the larger sections (like Family), and change my external drive's folder hierarchy to reflect that, eg Family/Christmas or Family/School/Graduation etc. That's the easy part though...going through negatives that date back to the late 50s and included not only my stuff, but my father's and my father-in-law's, and figuring out dates...that was the time consuming part, as well as wating for the Nikon ES-2 negative copy adapter to supplement the ES-1 I had. There is LIGHT at the end of this tunnel!

Thanks for all the suggestions, all useful. I think I may go the three ring binder route. There can be binders for various categories and I have enough bookshelf space available. The Print File sheets have proven their worth to me. Our critical mice are in the attic, not the bookshelves, though I do have to worry about the next Katrina or Ida.

Yes, I realize that, but it could happen, and they won't take up that much space. And I have been sure to tell them ( lay the guilt on them) about all the long work I did to digitize them for them. ;-) Many of them were in print file sheets in a three ring binder from YEARS ago, and they were fine. Just kept on a bookshelf.

I spent a lot of time during the last year digitizing family slides and negatives, and organizing them. I left the slides in their "carousals" or the original slide boxes and the negatives I put into Print File archival negative preservers. My question is about the negatives in their archival sleeves: How to best store them? Chances are they will not be seen again until my children are going through my belongings after I depart, hoping that's a LOONG time, decades I expect. Right now I have them nestled in hanging folders in a file drawer, but would something else be better, eg a three ring binder, or laying flat in a large sealed Rubbermaid or Tupperware container? Some of these negatives are over 60 years old. They were kept in their original preservers that came from drugstores and occasional camera shops or fast processing labs like Wolf Photo. Actually that kept them very well. They were always in climate controlled areas of my house. I appreciate any feedback and suggestions.

it can't be done; they are camera specific

When I first started printing about a year ago, I was a real novice. I had trouble printing from lightroom, the subscribed version of that time. I was "educated" by the wisdom of the internet that Q Image One was what I needed, the answer to my printing problems. My "problems" were mostly related to centering an image on the paper. I was green enough to not know that 8x10 was not 8.5x11, nor that 8.5x11 is also US Letter. I know that now. Most of my problems were related to centering an image on US Letter paper. After fooling around with QI for a while, getting it to mostly work on 5x7 and 4x6, and LrC going through a few upgrades, I again tried the Print module in LrC and to my surprise, no matter what the paper size, assuming I entered the data properly, prints were centered just fine and I could easily manipulate the borders successfully. However, QI has more controls, the double border I like, it has paper profiles for many many papers, it looks to be more flexible(?), etc, so I again tried it tonight to print out images on US Letter paper ( I was using Kirkland[ Costco] glossy 8.5x11 as my test paper). In Live View in QI all looks fine, I have selected US Letter--trying both bordered and borderless , other glossy paper, other glossy wide margin, fit to page, Intellicenter...it always comes out the same, with a dialed in border on the left margin, and half of that on the right. Also I do not see how to have a wider border on the bottom than the top. LrC has NONE of those problems...what I dial in I get, but am I missing something with the only paper profiles being glossy or matte? The images look just as good whether QI or LrC. The simple answer is just use LrC and forget about QI, but the frustration of not being able to get it right in QI, especially since everyone online touts its wonderfulness, makes me wonder if I am missing some simple fix? Both QI and Lrc are up to date, Canon Pro 10. Looking for therapy here! Thanks in advance. I include 2 screenshots showing Live View from QI, However, when I print out this image the left margin is 4mm and the right one is 1mm. As you can see I have the inner and outer borders set at 0.2 inches--5mm. Printing from the print module in LrC the left border is 5.0mm and the right is just under the 5mm mark--insignificant.

So, I installed them. They did go into the profiles section of LrC, not the presets section, but I'm not impressed with much of a difference. I was hoping that by installing them I would get the "look" of Fuji film, as I remember it, but that was not the case. I am sure using Fuji equipment and then LrC would produce more significant results. The way I remember Reala, and why it was my favorite, was not because it reproduced colors as accurately as possible--as the Kodak films did, but it produced colors the way one's eye saw them, or remembered them. IOW it inserted a "human bias" into the reproduction of colors. I liked that a lot.

Thanks for both responses and @digitalgod...yeah I was afraid of that. I did find Free Lightroom Profiles Archives they offer different sections for "profiles" and presets. I downloaded a few but haven't installed them yet, so I don't know if they are presets or profiles. They had "profiles" for a couple of Fuji films, but not Reala.

I just saw a webinar about Lightroom and the presenter was using a Fugi camera. He discussed the color profiles that Fuji had made for Lightroom, there are 16 on them, including profiles for some of Fuji's classic films, eg Velvia. IOW changing the color profile to the Velvia setting, makes the image look as if it was shot using Velvia. I am shooting with a Nikon d810, but long ago I used to shoot with Velvia and Reala, especially liking Reala. IN my profile browser I do not see how to add profiles to the list, in fact I do not see profiles listed as "Nikon," though there are lots of profiles listed. Is there a way to add profiles to the list, and how, and where would the profiles be accessed? TIA

Baddeck, Nova Scotia

Smugmug changed the way they link photos and I haven't done so for a while. I think I have it now, but sorry for the huge image

just catching this...that's an r1200gs in my avatar in White Sands National Park, NM. I've done much of that ride, including Hillbilly Hotdogs, when they were open, on my former bike, a r1200r. I do my ride reports over on advrider and r1200rforum.com and r1200gs.info under the moniker Dr. Strangelove. A ride report on photo.net! who woulda thunk it? I'm getting the urge for a long ride these days. I had a planned ride around PEI and down the St. Lawrence River valley last spring, but China had other plans...not sure if that opportunity is now lost. Thanks for the report, and very cool ride, like the silver and red,,,a Buckeye paint job?

it depends If I an doing primarily street, I like my 20/2.8 if I am doing general city, and some landscape, the 16-35/4 if shooting people on the street-like at festivals (Mardi Gras), and landscape, the 24-70 So it would depend on where you're traveling If I could only take one lens it would be either the 16-35 or the 24-70, and if pushed, the 16-35

Shell Rotella T-6 and if you start a tire thread, Pirelli Scorpion Trail II s are my favs for my GS

And the ES-2 !