bebu_lamar

<p>I get a new (to me) PC with Windows 7 pro 64 bit can I use my good old Photoshop CS2? I can install Windows XP in this computer as I have all the drivers for XP but I only have the XP pro 64 bit of Windows so it won't take advantage of 64 bit CPU (I mean for other software not CS2 as it's a 32 bit app any way) besides the memory is limited to 3.5 GB or so.</p>

<p>I tried the app with my wife Samsung Galaxy S4 and it works fine. Tried with my iphone 4s works fine too. Bought the Nexus 7 for the purpose and it doesn't work well at all. </p>

<p>I think you asked the right question but the answer would be long as it would require one to review the specs and of all those cameras. May be if I have time it would be a good excercise. </p>

<p>+1 Q.G.!<br> For macro it's not something you would do quickly like shooting an event so either manual with flash meter or chimping is better approach.<br> Non TTL auto flash works very well for me when I need to shoot quickly like covering an event. I don't like TTL for digital because it involves pre flash which actually increase shutter lag quite a bit. Before 1995 or so TTL flash doesn't do any pre flashes at all. I know that the Nikon F5 and some others started to use some form of preflashes. </p>

<blockquote> <p>Based on questions and comments we get from people who style themselves <em><strong>professional</strong> photographers</em> the problem is they grew up relying on auto-everything systems and many have very little idea how to handle any non-TTL flash system or any kind of off-camera system. It should not be complicated to put a plain-vanilla monolight with a white umbrella on a stand and use a flash meter to determine aperture, but apparently it is. YMMV</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> Totally agree with Henry on this one. Seeing so many posts here and other photo forums I feel that many photographers today consider a non TTL flash totally useless. </p>

<p>While the 35mm f/2.5 series E does perform well it doesn't look nice on the FM series. I mention that because I think your FM2n is no longer the photographer but it's now the model. </p>

You're right that Metz flashes do support TTL but not all functions and also because people today seem too much afraid of using third party flashes. I think Nikon and Canon did a good job confusing the consumers so they are afraid of buying other brands.

<p>I do like Metz flashes. Third party flashes aren't selling so well because so many people nowaday consider if the flash doesn't do TTL then it's not usable. But I think the demise of Metz has to do with more things than just flashes as they do make a lot of other electronic stuff. </p>

<p>I had the Df since Dec 26th 2013 and I have only used the exposure compensation dial once just to make sure that it works. I never actually use it as I never use the EC.<br> I do understand many people nowaday consider the EC as the primary mean to control exposure. They may have the camera on P, Or on A if they need certain amount of DOF on S if they need a particular shutter speed. Even on M if they need to shoot at a certain combination of shutter speed and aperture still the mean to control exposure is the built in light meter and the EC dial. (of course when the camera is in M mode the ISO is in auto). If the meter does it well then fine if it doesn't do it to your liking there goes the EC dial. </p>

<p>I have done my own before. It was more expensive but I don't know about now. It's more consistent with a machine though. And yeah I can afford to buy one of those C41 machine as places like Walmart getting rid of them but I need volume to run it otherwise the chemical just goes dead unused. </p>

<p>The bottom line is I won't have Walmart do my C41 as they took my roll of film and give me nothing. All I want with C41 is the processed negatives I would not careless about the scan and prints. </p>

<p>I assume the OP wants to restore the camera so it's fully functioning rather than for practical use. For practical use I much rather use a hand held meter or the sunny 16 than the built in Cds meter. I also agree with the previous post that how can you be sure that the Cds cell is bad? Many things could be wrong with the meter. </p>

<p>Film actually only has negative. What you call positive is reversal or double negative. Pun intended though.</p>

<p>I have only a few digital cameras. I also reset the clocks twice a year and all of them are off by several minutes. My quart watches while not very accurate can keep time better than 15 sec a month and even so they are still off by more than minutes every 6 months. </p>

<p>The disadvantage I mentioned in earlier post about the DX is the same for Canon and Pentax and Sony A mount. While all lenses can be used,(depending on which model we're talking about) the mounts are designed for the full frame size of film or sensor and not for the smaller size. If the mounts were designed for the APS-C sensor size then the flange distance can be shorter as the mirror is shorter and thus allowing for the normal lens to be of normal design and not the retrofocus design which requires extra elements as well as the front element to be much larger than the entrance pupil. This fact makes the normal lens for the DX format to be more expensive than that of the full frame format. </p>

<p>I don't think you can find quality work for less. At $1 a slide if the work is high quality I think that's a bargain already. If you shoot the slides today what is the cost per slide for film and processing?</p>

<p>One thing I don't want my camera to serve as watches but I do want my computer and cellphone to serve as clock and watches because they have connection to either cell tower and the internet which they can use to sync the time settings. The built in clock in the cameras have much more drift than a typical quartz watch. </p>

<p>What's Kelby said is Nikon doesn't make a camera for you so buy a Canon. So you can determine for yourself whether or not Nikon makes a camera for you. Each of us has different want and need. </p>

<p>Why is the post here? I know there are full frame and half frame 35mm camera but I don't think the OP is talking about a film camera. <br> Any way, there are many differences between a full frame and a DX camera like the D7000. The differences can be either advantages or disadvantages depending on what you want to do with the camera. <br> There is one disadvantage that has to do only with the DX format that is the lens mount. The lens mount on DX cameras were designed for the film camera which were full frame so that it's not optimized for the DX format. The lens mount for the M4/3 format doesn't have this problem as the lens mount was designed for the format. </p>

<p>For slides I think it's not much of a problem. For negative it's quite difficult.</p>

<p>I care a lot for how my camera looks and I am willing to pay for it. But... The golden Df just looks down right ugly. If someone uses it, it simply proves that the person has very bad taste. </p>

<p>The radio trigger only transmit the firing trigger and nothing else. There is no other communication than that is available. So with the radio trigger even TTL is not possible. In fact when used with a radio trigger the Nikon SB is no better than most of the el cheapo non dedicated flashes. </p>

<p>I have only one reason is that I already have perfectly good film equipment.<br> I do like to use the view camera and large format but I don't have those equipment. </p>

<p>I don't see much of a reason except spending money when you've already own the D7100. </p>

<p>One should try to almost always nail the exposure during the shoot. Not even during the RAW conversion. But you still need post processing. Post processing should not be used as a mean to correct bad exposure. </p>