sharon_schieber

<p>Just thought I'd add to the discussion on what happens if you've recently purchased CS4. I'd just received my copy of CS4 on Friday 4/9/10 (shame on me for not knowing CS5 was launching within days). Anyway, I called Adobe today, the sales rep said my question was the number one call topic for today. I don't know the cut-off date, but thankfully I'm eligible for a free upgrade. CS5 ships at the end of the month, ETA May 5, 2010. By the way, I have always found it better to place an order over the phone with Adobe rather than their website. Their sales reps are hungry to make a deal and so far I've always been able to get products for a lot less than their list price on the site.</p>

<p >Thank you for the many replies, it’s been a very interesting learning experience reading the many points of view on this—photo.net is a wonderful resource. As I mentioned earlier I’m probably looking for a “Honda Solution” to this question of making larger prints. I realize for top-quality I’d need MF or LF film but it’s not an area I’m ready to jump into. On the other hand stitching seems to offer an interesting solution, but I can see it being a bit more cumbersome in shooting and post process, Dave, I think you made some good points there, getting just the right shot can be complicated enough let alone needing to take multiple pictures for the stitch and the processing time afterwards. I can see it as a good solution occasionally but not the route I'd want to go on a regular basis.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I think my choice at this point is the Sony or the Canon—while they may not be the absolute “perfect choice” for “perfectly” enlarged prints—again it’s kind of that back to the Honda analogy—it may not be the best or most professional option, but at normal viewing distances I think I’ll be pretty happy with the results. I have an enlarged photo on my office wall from my 10MP Canon point-n-shoot that receives a lot of compliments—though I suppose a professional eye might see it differently. : ) </p>

<p > </p>

<p >So my question now is which way to go—Canon or Sony? I like the price of the Sony as well as the lens suggestions and I find myself leaning in that direction. But again, I've read a few negative comments regarding noise with the Sony (even at 200 ISO) which concerns me in regard to large prints. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Any opinions between these two camera options for this purpose? Would the noise issue steer you toward the Canon? Any suggestions for a couple of lenses for the Canon (high quality but without breaking the bank)? Thanks again for your thoughts everyone!</p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p>Hi Bill, You've got me confused, I rechecked my post to see if I said anything about a 16-85 mm accidentally, but just see my mention of the same lenses you brought up as well. Oh well, thanks for taking the time to reply. </p>

<p >I really appreciate all the great feedback. It takes time to compose a response and it is very much appreciated that each of you took the time to write, thank you!</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Yes, I figured that digital SLRs were not up to this task as compared to medium format digital or film, but being comfortable with an SLR, I wanted to see what my options are at this point. While I like Nikon, it does seem that for now they don’t have what I need without spending a boatload of money. On the other hand, of the Canon 5D reviews I’ve read, reviewers seem dubious of it’s older focusing system and other quality control issues—for $2500 I would think I ought to be able to expect a fairly fault-free camera, but alas, what do I know! If it isn’t already obvious, you’re communicating with someone who doesn’t have a Lexus budget—more like a Ford! But I do realize that there’s a price to pay for higher quality results.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >The Sony A850 does look appealing, the reviews I’ve read so far seem quite positive. (So maybe I should be thinking Honda now as a compromise, okay, enough with the car comparisons)! I hadn’t thought about a Sony before—in the world of cameras, is it a good choice in terms of reputation, product support, etc…? </p>

<p > </p>

<p >It would seem a Zeiss 24-70 makes sense for the A850—it’s hard to take spending the same amount as the camera, but I realize there’s not a lot of logic in buying a high-powered camera only to put something less than excellent on it. Imaging Resource mentioned that along with the debut of the A850 Sony announced a new 28-75 f2.8 lens for around $800, but I haven’t found a real review on it yet. Therein lies my dilemma, both the camera and lens are so new, I wonder if it would be smarter to wait-and-see for a while to make sure I’m not jumping into something I might regret later. Some of the comments about noise make me pause—particularly with regard to making large prints. And if Sony is going to heat up the market with such competitive pricing on a full sensor with high MP, will it be long before everyone else follows suit. Hmmm…. </p>

<p >Thanks again for your thoughts! </p>

<p>I've seen a similar question asked but want to ask it in a slightly different way! I am interested in printing poster-sized 24x36 (or even larger 32x48) landscapes pictures. I am assuming I want a camera with great focusing ability as well as lots of pixel resolution. I have been considering the D300, the D700 and the Canon 5D Mark II. Of course I'd rather spend less (the D300), but I am assuming for large sized prints a full sensor makes more sense--or does it? While the D700's full sensor provides 12 MP, the Canon's full sensor is 21 MP so it would seem to be the more logical choice, however I'm a Nikon fan. Am I just being brand loyal and silly? I have also read comparison reviews and get the feeling that Nikon makes a better product. What do you think is the best choice between the two or even 3(the D300) for large print landscape photography--which camera is likely to provide the crispest results when enlarged? <br>

Also, if you suggest a camera preference, what lens would you suggest for such work, I know good glass makes all the difference. I'd like to be able to use a zoom somewhere in the neighborhood of 16mm to 85mm. Any hyperlinks to furthering my education is much appreciated! Thank you in advance for your knowledge and time taken to respond!</p>