reid_priedhorsky

<p>I'd take ONE lens, especially if your trip mates are not photographers.</p>

<p>That part of the world is extremely dusty and gritty - minimize lens changes, and protect your gear from dust when it's not in use (i.e., don't hike with your camera bare around your neck).</p>

<p>Good luck! Sounds like a wonderful trip. I'm jealous.</p>

<p>Set all the meters to center weighted or all to spot - that will remove matrix metering smarts from the test, which is likely to be what's throwing you off (as noted above).</p>

<p>You can do it but the edges of the frame will look pretty bad. I suggest you embrace the fisheye effect rather than fighting it! Fisheyes are fun lenses - keep them that way. :)</p>

<p>Closer to 17mm might work OK.</p>

<p>Is "don't do it" a valid suggestion? :) I've never seen such an effect that I liked, and so often I find them horribly cheesy and definitely not fine-art-like. Take advantage of your presentation medium - if a print, choose a nice frame, if digital, choose appropriate surrounding design elements.</p>

<p>If you do follow up on John's suggestion, it's spelled "Corel" I believe.</p>

<p>Reid</p>

<p>JP,</p>

<p>It's a mistake to spend your full budget right away as a newbie. Photography is a complex (and fun!) hobby and it's easy to misjudge what you're interested in before you get started - thus, if you have no budget left to use as you develop your craft, you'll be sad.</p>

<p>Frankly, I don't think there's any need to go directly from a P&S to a FF DSLR. I think you would be very happy with a D90 and 18-105 to start - then, acquire more stuff piecemeal, as you identify clear gaps in your photography that are indeed rectified by equipment, not skill development (and those gaps are much less frequent than most people think).</p>

<p>Also I think you will have more fun if your starting kit is simpler and less expensive. The learning curve will be more enjoyable.</p>

<p>Dallas, the sensor and much of the guts of these two cameras are the same. Thus, if you can't articular clear reasoning why you need the D300s, save your money.</p>

<p>Remember that next year's bodies will wallop whatever is available now. Maybe your $700 is best spent on upgrading sooner when the next generation is available?</p>

<p>Good luck,</p>

<p>Reid</p>

<p>Tyler, I think it's important to thoroughly identify your gaps before planning lens purchases. What are the flaws in your photography? What would you like to do that you can't do or it's difficult to do? Would more equipment help, or do you just need to work on your technique? If and only if the former, <em>then</em> consider what equipment to buy.</p>

<p>You seem to have done this a little, but I suggest you think more before looking at specific lenses.</p>

<p>Believe me, I've made this mistake several times and it cost me a bunch of money. :)</p>

<p>Good luck,</p>

<p>Reid</p>

<p>Picasa (correct spelling) works but is hellaciously slow.</p>

<p>I use and like Bibble. You'll want version 5 as 4 does not support the D90. It comes with a free trial (as most payware RAW converters do).</p>

<p>Keep your money and be patient - the next generation of DX bodies will have better noise control, the next still better, etc.</p>

<p>Also consider postprocessing techniques. B&W conversions generally have higher noise tolerance - I get results with the iNDA plugin for Bibble 5, but there are many techniques here. Or, consider noise control software e.g. NoiseNinja. Are you shooting raw? If not, you should be.</p>

<p>Lastly, figure out if your expectations are in line. A limit of ISO 800 on a D90 seems low. If you're exposing correctly (as suggested above), perhaps you're just being too picky. :)</p>

<p>Good luck,</p>

<p>Reid</p>

<p>In regards to the Tamron, I had the previous iteration (the 18-250) rebadged by Pentax, and the vignetting was truly foul: falloff was uneven between the corners and quite abrupt. More:</p>

<p>http://blog.reidster.net/2009/11/vignetting-analysis-pentax-da-18-250-vs.html</p>

<p>I have no idea whether this applies to the 18-270, of course.</p>

<p>I think the general advice is, buy any lens well before the trip and give it a thorough workout within the return period to make sure it meets your needs.</p>

<p>I have this body/lens combination.</p>

<p>The Top Load Zoom 1 is somewhat too large IMO. The TLZ Mini is a hair too small.</p>

<p>The TLZ AW will be far too large -- look at the huge lens displayed next to it in the sample photo: http://products.lowepro.com/product/Topload-Zoom%20AW,2053.htm</p>

<p>My current bag is a Tamrac Aero Zoom 30, which fits the body/lens just right. The drawbacks: the strap is not very nice and makes the bag hang somewhat awkwardly (easy to fix, I think, if you are willing to do some modding), and the pockets are tiny, so there's no room for a filter.</p>

<p>Good luck,</p>

<p>Reid</p>

<p>Thanks folks!</p>

<p>I tried both Ian and Bryan's suggestions and they are both comfortable, and I think some practice will make it just fine.</p>

<p>Much appreciated!</p>

<p>Reid</p>

<p>I come from Pentax, where my hand positioning for lenses was extremely natural for me, enough so that I never thought about it. The key ergonomic differences - as far as I can tell - are (1) the lens release is where the DOF preview button is on my D90, and (b) the bayonet mount turns the the opposite direction. I'd grasp the camera body with my right hand just as if I were taking a photo, activate the release with my right finger, and manipulate the lenses with my left hand. Easy as pie.</p>

<p>On the other hand (sorry), with my D90 I haven't yet figured out how to change lenses without a lot of awkward mucking around, particularly if I'm trying to keep the body pointed downward so I don't drop junk into it.</p>

<p>Any suggestions would be much appreciated.</p>

<p>I'm sometimes left-handed and sometimes right, and I'm not sure exactly which applies in this situation other than manipulating the lenses with my left hand feels more natural.</p>

<p>Reid</p>

<p>I've tinkered with it a little bit and found it to be extremely awkward. I'd consider it a fake feature myself (i.e., something they added so they could check off another box in the feature list but that isn't actually of any use).</p>

<p>I currently have two batteries. Shun, I think you're right: the last similar trip I made 600 frames. After looking a bit more, that's just one battery under good conditions. So three is probably plenty.</p>

<p>I think that it's more about peace of mind than actual need. If I have charging apparatus along, then I don't need to worry about running out. But I don't believe that merits a few hundred dollars and 1-2 kg of equipment.</p>

<p>Michael: yes, we'll be in the backcountry the whole time. No access to cars or other civilized things -- just the way I like it. :)</p>

<p>Hi all,<br>

I have a 9-day backpacking trip to the Grand Canyon coming up. Lots of sun. I'm trying to decide between the pile-of-batteries and solar charging approaches. Does anyone have suggestions on the latter? Specific equipment you recommend?<br>

I'm not sure that I have the budget for Brunton SolarRoll 14 recommended by Thom Hogan.<br>

Much appreciated,<br>

Reid</p>

<p>Hi Bj,</p>

<p>Yes, the TLZ 1 is too big. The camera fits fine, but there's extra room and it makes the bag larger and clunkier than I'd like. I'd prefer a snugger fit. I have both the TLZ Mini and TLZ 1 - it's not just speculation. :)</p>

<p>The Pelican perfect world is because I do a lot of photography on canoeing and desert backpacking trips, which are wet and dusty environments. A Pelican would protect the camera from blowing dust (present even inside a tent to some extent) and in case I fell into the water.</p>

<p>The TLZ Mini does not support the chest harness officially, but it's easy to add some extra rings and then it works fine.</p>

<p>Thanks,</p>

<p>Reid</p>

<p>Dear group,<br>

I have a new D90 with Nikkor 18-200 and I'm looking for a bag.<br>

What I want to carry:</p>

<ul>

<li>D90</li>

<li>Nikkor 18-200</li>

<li>1 spare battery</li>

<li>1 72mm filter</li>

<li>Tripod plate (not necessarily attached to camera)</li>

<li>Gray card (small)</li>

<li>Lens pen</li>

<li>Tiny blower (maybe)</li>

</ul>

<p>The camera + lens measures 13cm wide, 10.5cm tall, and 16.5cm long.<br>

My ideal would be basically a wedge-shaped top-loading Pelican case: hard-sided, waterproof, with custom foam insert. I'd settle for rectangular.<br>

Also fine would be something exactly like the Lowepro TLZ mini but 1cm taller (I can cram the camera and lens in and <em>almost</em> close the zipper, so I don't need much more).<br>

I don't like:</p>

<ul>

<li>Lowepro TLZ Mini (about 1cm too short).</li>

<li>Lowepro TLZ 1 (too big).</li>

</ul>

<p>First time poster. Any suggestions very much appreciated.<br>

Reid</p>