dspindle

<p>Thanks, everyone. Just what I needed. Your help is much appreciated!<br>

Hans......haven't received camera yet. Any day now! Was just reading up and getting ready.</p>

<p>I'm confused about the AF-ON button on the D700. If I assign AF to the AF-ON button only (not the shutter release) does the AF-ON button lock focus? In other words can I focus on my subject using the AF-ON button....let go......and then recompose and press the shutter release? Or do I need to hold down the AF-ON button while recomposing and pressing the shutter release? (I'm using Single Point AF)<br>

Thanks,<br>

Dave</p>

<p>Seems like a little clarification is needed. You ask "Stay with D700 or Upgrade?". But then you say you have an opportunity to buy a refurbished D700.<br>

Also, if a product does "everything I need it to", why do you feel the need to upgrade?</p>

<p>Something as complex as this new business model Adobe is releasing is bound to have bugs and problems, especially in the early going.<br>

Think back to your last experience with Adobe's Customer Service.</p>

<p>I would check your track pad preferences and turn off certain gestures. I do not have a track pad, I use a Wacom tablet. However, the Wacom tablet can act like a track pad if you wish, but I was constantly brushing the surface with a stray finger so I disabled some features in Preferences. You should be able to do the same with the track pad I would think.<br>

If you use brushes frequently in Photoshop, nothing beats a good tablet. I love my Wacom.</p>

<p>John,<br>

Thanks for replying. You are undoubtably correct that using a database should be the answer. I did try Lightroom for awhile. Maybe I am to old or to stubborn but it just never "clicked" for me. I am much more comfortable using Bridge and creating my own folders on my hard drive. Very old school, but it works for me.<br>

Anyway, I like the stacking idea. I already make use of that for HDR and Focus stacks within Bridge. I'll give it a try with my PSD's and RAW files as well.<br>

Thanks again!<br>

Dave</p>

<p>As you work your way through the image editing process, where do you store your files?<br>

Here is what I do currently:<br>

My RAW files are in a folder I created when I uploaded them from my camera. When I edit a RAW file in ACR I can return at any time to this folder to make further changes if I wish. <br>

If I want to make further edits in Photoshop I will save a .PSD copy to a folder called PSD's. <br>

If I want to add this image to my portfolio I will flatten the .psd file and save out as a .tiff or .jpeg to a folder named Portfolio.<br>

Would it be better to put all these files in the same folder? It has occurred to me that it would be nice to have the RAW, PSD and flattened files right next to each other in the same folder. Especially if I changed the file name for the flattened Portfolio file.<br>

Your suggestions would be greatly appreciated.<br>

Thanks!<br>

Dave</p>

<p>Ellery,<br>

Yes, you are correct. Technically it's a bit of a wash since you generally get one more stop of DOF with DX than FX. However this particular DX camera is a 24mpx high res camera. So now I am shooting around f/8 or f/11 along with focus stacking at times for maximum DOF. All I am saying is that it's different than the D90. I have to pay more attention to little things like making sure my camera plane is as parallel as possible with the subject. Macro is hard work, as I am sure you know. So this is really not that big of a deal to me. What is a big deal to me is the final photograph. And the quality is just stunning, absolutely gorgeous. And well worth doing things that I probably should have been doing all along.<br>

Please keep in mind that these observations are based on the use of one macro lens. The Sigma 150. I do not own another macro lens. And I'm to lazy to break out the extension tubes for other lenses! I also am rarely at 1:1, most of the time I shoot around 1:2. It would be interesting to hear other macro shooters impressions. I do have a few images that are in processing, and when I get them cleaned up, I'll send you an email with a link.<br>

Regarding FX/DX, take a look at the post on page two titled "Nikon D600 or D7100?" I started that thread about a week or so ago and there are several pages of very good comments. The responses I received were very helpful to me in deciding to go with the D7100. <br>

Dave</p>

<p>Just wanted to second others here. I think you need to consider a better quality lens. The D7100 with it's high resolution is not a good match with that lens. If you can't afford a high quality lens right now, I would wait until you can. You might consider the Nikon 50mm f/1.8. Very affordable and a great little lens for the price. Or take a look at the new Nikon 24-85 VR zoom. Also a good choice in my opinion. I have both of these lenses and use them on my D7100 and they produce wonderful photos.<br>

Dave</p>

<p>Ellery,<br>

I also shoot mostly macro and come from the D90. In response to #2 on your list, here are my observations. My macro lens is the Sigma 150 f/2.8 macro. What I have experienced that is different from the D90 is that on the D90 I would routinely make use of f/22 for increased DOF. With the D7100 diffraction renders an image that is extremely soft. So be prepared to see diffraction set in earlier than you've been used to. Also, be ready to take a second look at your shooting discipline regarding sharp focus. In other words, the D7100 is giving me stunning macro images, but I am having to pay more attention to the basics than I did with the D90. With the high resolution of this camera any weaknesses in shooting discipline will be quite obvious. The same goes for lenses, use the best you can afford.<br>

It's a marvelous camera that is quite a step up from the D90. Hope this is helpful for you.<br>

Dave</p>

<p>I just wanted to add something to my previous post. It's great having full support now for the D7100 in Lightroom and Photoshop. But for some reason my Macbook Pro can't read the RAW files in Finder. Has any one else experienced this?<br>

Thanks.<br>

Dave</p>

<p>I suspect that the "quiet" responses reflect users evaluating the new camera. I have had mine for a week. I upgraded from the D90 so there has been a lot to learn. Here are some first impressions.<br>

The way it feels when I hold it and the general layout of buttons and dials is close enough to the D90 to feel very comfortable. I love the new mode and shooting dial on the top left. Some find it awkward to use, but I love it. The FN and Depth of Field preview buttons are reversed from the D90. As are the zoom plus/minus buttons for playback on the back. I like the finish on the camera, it has a nice "grippy" feel. The viewfinder is great, big bright and easy to use. The Auto Focus system is wonderful. Totally different than the D90, but very easy to understand and use. Even better, it actually works perfectly! I do very little high ISO work, almost never shoot in really low light and don't use video so I have nothing to comment regarding those features.<br>

The few images I have taken are stunning. I am a tripod shooter, use only single point AF, and shoot RAW / standard. The raw/standard setting seems to me to be a little more saturated than I got on the D90. Almost like the Vivid setting was on the D90. Moving from 12mpx to 24mpx is a real jump. I'm glad I have very good lenses. (16-35 f/4, 24-85vr, 70-200 f/r vr). Even so, if a person is coming from the D90 like me, be prepared to encounter diffraction earlier than you used to. So far I have only been shooting with the 70-200 and my Sigma 150 macro. On both lenses, noticeable diffraction shows up at f/11 and get worse as I stop down. I used to comfortably use f/22 on the macro lens for example that only required minor sharpening in PS. With the D7100, f/22 using the Sigma macro is unusable. However, at f/8 and larger both lenses on the D7100 produce beautiful, razor sharp photos. Nothing to report on the wide angle 16-35 as I haven't tried it out yet. I have taken only a few handheld shots with the 24-85 but they are superb.<br>

So, it's early days, but overall I like the camera very much. I imagine in the next few weeks you will begin to see more in-depth responses as people finish setting up and testing. Especially now that we have full ACR and Lightroom support!<br>

Dave</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I wanted to provide an update, and also to thank all of you for your responses. I have decided the D7100 is the best choice for me. As I said, I take mostly close ups and macros, and what I would call medium wide angle landscapes. I don't shoot wildlife or sports. Actually, the 16-35 f/4 in a DX format is perfect for me. <br>

The journey of deciding between DX and FX has been fascinating. It forced me to ask myself hard questions. It made me realize once again that continually learning to compose and take better photographs is more important ultimately than what camera I'm working with. It made me more aware that just because the Nikon marketing gurus say that the "natural progression" from a D90 should be a D600 doesn't necessarily mean it is right for me. And, surprisingly, this journey has made me appreciate just what a terrific camera my D90 is also. I have been very comfortable with it, and I think the D7100 will be a nice upgrade for my style of photography.<br>

Anyway, it's been very educational and fun and thank you! As soon as ACR and Lightroom catch up, and Kirk gets an L-Bracket to fit the D7100, I will be ordering one. I'm very excited, and can't wait.<br>

Dave</p>

<p>Thanks, everyone for your helpful responses. I appreciate you taking the time. Hector...I should have mentioned this in my original post; most of my nature photography is macro/close up and landscape. No wildlife or birds. I believe the Sigma 150 macro will work fine with the D600, but I'm doubtful about the D7100.<br>

Anyway, lots to consider. Thanks again!</p>

<p>I have owned a D90 for quite some time. I shoot mostly nature related photography and recently decided to upgrade to full-frame. Before purchasing a camera I decided to upgrade my lenses. Here are the lenses I now own: Nikon 50mm 1.8, Nikon 16-35 f/4, Nikon 24-85 VR, Nikon 70-200 f/4 VR and a Sigma 150 f/2.8 Macro.<br>

I have been hesitant to purchase the D600 for two reasons. The "dust" issue, and the tightly packed focus points grouped in the center. I had just decided that I could learn to live with focus and re-compose with regard to the focus points, and wait for a little while on the dust problem and hope I get lucky enough to buy one that no longer has the problem.<br>

Now, along comes the D7100 with focus points where I want them (and more of them) and I am re-thinking this whole DX to FX thing. I know that if I buy the D7100 I would not be getting the full potential from the lenses I purchased (especially the 16-35). But if I purchase the D600, I am mostly getting a bigger viewfinder and a larger sensor, correct? Am I really going to see enough significant image quality difference between a 24mpx DX sensor and a 24mpx FX sensor to justify putting up with possible dust problems and an auto focus array I don't like?<br>

I'd love to hear your thoughts and advice...thanks! </p>

<p>I happened to be browsing in the Apple App store when I saw for sale "Photoshop Elements 10 Editor Only". <br>

I am a huge Elements fan since the early versions, but I have never cared for the "Organizer" and all the other "guided" edit and "sharing" features. Now, I have just the un-bloated Editor, and boy is it nice. Loads fast, runs clean and is a pleasure to use. One note; if you use Nik or other 3rd party software plug-ins you need to right-click the Elements 10 Editor Only icon, and then click on "show package contents" to locate the plug-in folder.<br>

So, if you've been using Elements and love the Editor, but hate all the baggage it comes with, then you should check it out. By the way, this is the exact full-edit Editor that is found in the full version 10. Not sure if it's available for Windows, as I downloaded mine from the Apple App Store straight to my Macbook pro.<br>

Dave </p>

<p>Emil, thank you! Your point #(1) is also what I have been doing. #(2) is interesting, and I will give it a try...thanks very much!</p>

<p>Dave</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses! It's probably something best learned by watching someone actually do it. Oh well, I'll keep at it!<br>

Sheldon, I'd love a Wacom...is there one you recommend?<br>

Thanks again!<br>

Dave</p>

<p>I have been learning hand-HDR, and while I understand how to stack layers, create layer masks and paint on the mask, the technique of painting with a brush at low opacity has me confused.<br>

I've heard that using an opacity setting for my brush of around 20% is best, because this will allow me to slowly build up the image the way I want it to look. <br>

How do I brush at 20%? Overlap of brush strokes is inevitable, and each overlap will result in a "hot spot" of 40% or more. It seems like a good idea, but I must be missing something. <br>

Thanks!<br>

Dave</p>

<p>Make sure you are in the background layer. Hit the "S" key to bring up the clone tool. Uncheck "aligned". Pick your brush size. Now alt-click where you want to clone from.<br>

If this is not working, then I suggest you go to the Elements forum. It is far better to use the forum for answers than any other Adobe help tool...at least for me. Here is the link ..http://forums.adobe.com/community/photoshop_elements<br>

Good luck, David<br>

Dave</p>

<p>Thanks so very much for the great responses!<br>

Patrick...yes, I need the portability. Good point about the 13", I'll take a closer look at them.<br>

I won't be doing any video editing.<br>

I'll probably go for the 2.0 and just add the anti-glare display. Still undecided about the extra 4g of Ram since it's $200 if I do it now, and $400 if I do it later. I can't believe how much everything costs at Apple!<br>

Does anyone have experience buying refurbished from the Apple Store? They have some great deals with factory Apple warranties etc. (I just always wonder what caused them to be refurbished in the first place!)<br>

Thanks again!<br>

Dave</p>

<p>I'm trying to choose which 15" Macbook Pro to purchase for photo editing. I'd really appreciate any help you could offer.<br>

I'm not a pro. No "batch" processing, or dealing with hundreds of images at a time. I shoot 100 to 300 images per month. I keep all images on external drives, and would bring them in for editing...then back to the ext. drive. I use Elements 9 with Nik software plugins for all my editing. I edit one image at a time, and do make use of layers quite a bit. For final image checking, I plan to plug the laptop into a large hi-res monitor.<br>

Basically, I'm trying to choose between the 15" 2.0 ghz and the 15" 2.2 ghz. The 2.2 has a faster processor, a larger hard drive and a "better" graphics card.<br>

I also want the "anti-glare" display which is an option, and I'm assuming I should upgrade memory from 4 to 8 g. <strong> ***<em>Or can I get by with 4g of memory?</em></strong><br>

I don't really care about the larger hard drive, since I use external drives.<br>

<strong> ***<em>Do I really need the faster processor?</em></strong><br>

<strong><em>***Do I need the "better" graphics card?</em></strong> The 2.0 laptop uses AMD Radeon HD 6490M with 256MB GDDR5. The 2.2 laptop uses AMD Radeon HD 6750M with 1GB GDDR5.</p>

<p>Thank!<br>

Dave</p>