peter_wald
-
Posts
21 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by peter_wald
-
-
<p>Another happy ScanCafe user user. I did all of my old pre-digital pics this summer, and now am starting to do the old "family" pics. It's so efficient to have them do it for you instead of taking all of the time to do it yourself</p>
-
<p>Hi Mark,<br>
I'm in a similar situation as you in that I'm usually shooting at <200mm (12-24mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm) on a D200 and now a D7000. I went to Denali a few years ago and really need more reach. I bought an 80-400 and it worked great. Poeple have complained that it is slow but I found it fine for these distant widelife shots. There are a bunch of them available on KEH now in EX or better condition in the $900-1000 range. I don't use this lense much but it's been my go to lens for this range when I need it. I think it's worth the stretch if you can do it</p>
-
<p>I've been using the Feisol 3442 which goes down to 6 inches and folds for travel. They also make a bunch of heavier and lighter duty models. I'm also using mine with a D200 and up to 70-200mm zoom. Feisol has a US distributor here <a href="http://www.feisol.net/feisol-tournament-tripod-ct3442-rapid-p-31.html">http://www.feisol.net/feisol-tournament-tripod-ct3442-rapid-p-31.html</a>. I'm using the Acratech head</p>
-
<p>Another satisfied Vista x64 user. I built a machine with a P35 motherboard, quad core Q6600 and 8 GB of ram. Using Capture NX2 for most of my PP work. I've had no problems getting programs to run and drivers were available for everything except my old HP 720. This setup has been rock stable for about a year, and handled the SP! ungrade without problems. PP flies on this setup compared to 32 bit XP Pro with 3 GB</p>
-
Thanks to Peter and everyone on this thread. I think it's clearly to me now that the next step would be D700/ I think I'll stand pat for now and wait for the D700 prices to come down
-
Here's another try at the upload. It still had some jpeg compression artifact. I've just started using capture so I appologize that I can't seem to get a small enough file to upload from the raw version.
-
Sorry Shun, I'm rushing and I can't get the upload right. I'll try to reload but appreciate all of the help
-
-
Sorry Elliot. I was typing too fast. How large a print with good quality do you feel you can make with this combo
-
Shun, I'll post some images back tonight when I get home. We were advised to not use flash so we wouldn't disturb the bats, so I was trying to shoot with availbile light. I agree that for landscapes I usually use a tripod.
-
Thanks Elliot! This is extremely helpful. I don't usually print larger than A3. Anything bigger than that I would send out. How big do you feel you easily go with your D3 and 80-400?
-
Thanks James. I actually also have an 80-400 which works fine for me since I don't usually shoot action. Has anyone reported how it would work on a D700?
-
Hi All,
I currently have a D200 with 12-24, 24-70, 70-200, 50 and 85 1.4, 20 2.8 and an AF-D 105 macro. I also have an SB-
800 and a good tripod. I had a lot of older MF glass I've been changing out for these since my manual focus days are
probably behind me ( the 35 1.4 was the last to go). I am not a professional but have been taking pictures since the
late 60's. I shoot mostly nature with occasional party/portrait for friends. Here's my quandry. I've been using the D200
as my first digital camera for about 2 years. I'm really very happy with it, except for low light- last week I was
shooting bats emerging from a cave around sunset with the 50 and just couldn't get the shoots I wanted. Depending
on what I am shooting I also need some reach. I've been staying on DX since I was shooting a lot of tele, but got the
24-70 as insurance for a potential FX switch. Since I only have 1 DX lense I could probably go either way at this
point, either DX or FX
I feel like I need better high iso performance. I like the D200 form factor so I'd be looking at the D300 or D700, the D3
is just too big/expensive for my needs. Would it be worth going for the 700 over the 300 in terms of low light
performance. With what I lose in reach from the D300 could I get an equivalent or better quality in low light with a
crop from the D700. Thanks for your help
-
Hi Xavior
I've been using NX 1.3 on Vista-64 with 8 GB RAM with no problems. I haven't upgraded to 2.0 yet but I can't imagine it will be a problem.
-
I've also bought from them a number of times (lenses and accessories mostly) and have been satisfied. I'd buy from them again if they had what I needed
-
Jim there is a 64-bit download for syder2pro which allows it to run fine on Vista 64-bit. I only have a D200 and am running CS3 and Capture NX with no problems
-
John there is a related thread here:
<a href=http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00PX1W>link</a>
Another approach is to Run 64-bit vista, and run "any other operating system" in a virtual PC which is a free MS download. I'm doing this for some legacy software and it wotks great.
<a href=http://www.microsoft.com/windows/downloads/virtualpc/default.mspx>link</a>
-
I'm running Vista Business 64-bit with PS CS3 and the Nikon NX group (Capture, View and Transfer) on a quad-core self-made machine with 8Gb and a Dell 30." Everyting was runing fine with this set-up, and I did the SP1 upgrade about 2 weeks ago with no problems. Hope that helps
-
Hi David,
I'm an advanced amatuer. I've just replaced my main box and used Vista 64 to get 4 GB on Photoshop. I'm using a Dell 3007 and it calibrated fine SypderPro2. I had to download the updated version for 64-bit but otherwise no problems
Need a Tripod?
in Accessories
Posted