justine_k

<p>Thank you Nadine! I never realized there were some updates you needed to get from the Adobe website. I've always ever gone to the Help menu and clicked on "Updates." </p>

<p>Hmm. Wonder why that worked fine for the RAW update needed for the D300 on my work version and didn't for my home? My work version was actually installed waaay before my home one and I've never gone to the Adobe website for updates either.</p>

<p>Whatever, either way it is opening my RAW files now! Thanks again!</p>

<p>Hi all!</p>

<p>Thanks so much for the suggestions. I just got my computer late last night from my hubby, so I didn't get to check out the thread again.</p>

<p>Overall, everything went pretty well I'd say. They aren't the most fabulous pictures, and there was definitely a lot of tension with the previous woman who was going to do the pictures (and had a last minute change of heart for the getting ready/ceremony/posed pictures, so I just made myself scarce for those). As long as my friend got some good pictures, I was happy.</p>

<p>I'm completely comfortable shooting in all modes--the flash is the one thing that was going to throw me off just because I don't EVER shoot with one. But some of the events were in almost completely dark rooms, so I knew I'd have to drag it out. I was happy with how I did with the flash when it was needed. </p>

<p>Overall, it was an intersting dymanic with the different groups since there was drama over the last few weeks (even though I wasn't involved, you could have cut the tension with a knife at times...oh happy days!!!). I had a blast still, though, and hope that I have some pictures my girlfriend loves.</p>

<p>I forgot to have my hubby bring my memory card adaptor, so I can just view the pictures/zoom in on the screen...but they do look acceptable! Hopefully they are decent (by non-pro standards). I was defintely more comfortable with the detail pictures than people pictures. They just aren't my thing. </p>

<p>As far as PS3...I've done the updates several times and it always tells me I'm up to date (including just now) and it still won't open RAW files. UGH. Not sure what's going on, but hopefully I'll figure it out! If not, I guess I'll be processing at work for the most part (shhhh). I did do jpeg + RAW, so I at least have the jpegs to play around with if PS3 keeps being cranky. Grrr. Do I need to go to the website or something? I just assumed that clicking the updates from the drop down menu would make it good to go.</p>

<p>Thanks for the suggestion Pete S. It's the Tokina lens, which doesn't have TOO much distortion. Definitely some, but it's not as bad as some lenses. I've tested it against the walls in my house and they actually come out pretty straight even at 14mm. But "close ups" on the dog as 12mm definitely look off (so pathetic that 90% of my photos these days are on our dog!).</p>

<p>Oh--one question I just thought to ask. With the SB 600, how many shots can I expect (obviously just an approximation) with the lithium ion batteries over the "regular" AA? I have plenty of spares, I was just wondering at what point I can expect them to run out of juice. I use it so infrequently I really have no idea.</p>

<p>Thanks! I was thinking of shooting in A Mode. </p>

<p>I might need to shoot RAW + jpeg. It will take up wicked space, but last time I tried to open a RAW file last week with my PS3 it said the file type was invalid. It worked fine when I brought them to work to try, so I know it's not something with the way the files were writing to the card. I haven't had time to sit down and figure out what's going on (and I can't edit them all at work :-)</p>

<p>Luckily, the ceremony is outdoors so i don't need to worry about the flash in church issues!</p>

<p>

<p dir="ltr">Hello all!</p>

</p>

<p dir="ltr">A few weeks ago, I posted about a friend who had her soon to be husband's best friend's wife give them wedding photography as a wedding gift. Well, needless to say my friend told me 2 days ago the woman is no longer photographing the wedding (I'm leaving today for it). A bit of photography unrelated drama happened (ironically that had nothing to do with my friend or her finace, but rather people involver peripherially in the wedding, but anyhoo...), and she said she no longer wanted to do it. Of course my friend is upset, and has pretty much "resorted" to just asking that all the guests bring their cameras, capture their day the best they can, and burn them a CD afterwards (they are providing labeled CD's for everyone). So, now I'm definitely going to be taking as many photographs as possible during the event. I'm very confident that my friend will be happy with whatever she gets considering the circumstances, but I personally want to do the best job I possibly can for her.</p>

<p dir="ltr"> <br>

<p dir="ltr">No comments on whether or not I should be doing it, nor comments about "this is what happens when you mix personal and business" or anything to that effect. I'm going to do it for her no matter what--I've known her almost my entire life and is one of my best friends, and it's not my wedding and what's done on her end is done.</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">I'd just like some last minute helpful hints to get some great pictures. I'm bringing the following:</p>

<p dir="ltr">D300</p>

<p dir="ltr">12-24mm f/4</p>

<p dir="ltr">35mm f/1.8</p>

<p dir="ltr">50mm f/1.8</p>

<p dir="ltr">55-200mm kit lens (unfortunately, I haven't upgraded my telezooms to anything respectable...I think this should work out OK, as I'd probably only need this for stuff at the ceremony, and it is outdoors)</p>

<p dir="ltr">SB-600</p>

<p dir="ltr">I'm not very well versed on flash photography as I don't do much indoors. I have been practicing a lot with the dog the last couple days (my husband is not a very willing photography victim) with bounce photography. The reception is at their house, so I may or may not need the flash depending on how much time people spend inside versus outside.</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">I'm planning on taking a few "wide angle" shots with the 12-24mm during the ceremony from the back or when they are walking back down the aisle. Using the 55-200mm the rest of the time during the ceremony. Then I will just use the 35mm or 50mm during the reception. I also plan on doing some pictures during the other festivites during the weekend, using those two lenses as well.</p>

<p dir="ltr"> <br>

Unfortunately, I was looking for my extra battery and can't find it. So that's a big negative. I'll just bring the charger along, I guess, and charge as needed or sneak a few minutes in during down time during the events. Have a couple memory cards I'm bringing. Spare batteries for the flash. Am I forgetting anything? Any other suggestions??</p>

</p>

<p>I think you need an "about" section and to specify your location and area's you serve. I see you're in my area code, but didn't once find out where you are...Syracuse? St. Lawrence area? Oswego? </p>

<p> </p>

<p>My suggestion would be to be careful as to what pictures you're picking...I'm not so sure that most soccer mom's would look to you to photograph their family when the cute picture of the little girl is next to some dudes in a club getting wasted...and I think a soccer mom would also be turned off by the large photo of the tattoed arm right off the bat.</p>

<p>To put it bluntly. It does seem like you need to narrow down your target audience just a little. You might not totally be sure where you want to go with your photography, but if you want to make a living those are the things you probably need to consider. Not that photographing dudes in a club or tattoed guys is wrong. Just that the two groups of people generally aren't going to relate to the same things. </p>

<p>Because of things like that...the website gives me the impression of immaturity. No idea if it's true about you or not, but some of the photo choices give off that vibe. Again...nothing wrong with it...just depends on who you want to attract as clients. </p>

<p>And certainly there is nothing wrong with wanting to photograph it all. But not all paying customers are all on the same wavelength and it seems like the way the website is set up right now both "extremes" could possibly be turned off. Maybe 2 websites gearing to two different groups of people is in order.</p>

<p>I'm curious, how many of you have actually gotten amazing photos of the Dead Sea and what are your secrets?</p>

<p>I was just going through my pictures from Isreal (which I've hardly gotten to spend any time on since I went at the end of Feb), and I'm so disappointed in all of them. Granted, it was a hazy "blah" day...but I just couldn't capture anything decent. The scenery in that area is so monotone brown...and the color of the water is pretty bland. I just wasn't feeling it! Again, not sure if it was just the day we went or if it's just a landmark that is not easy to photograph. I have been obsessed with the Dead Sea since I was probably 10 years old, so I do have to say not having any good photos is disappointing.</p>

<p>I did come across some pictures much better than mine online during a google search. But I have to say that the majority of them are so ridiculously processed and over saturated that i don't care for them either. A lot of people seem to want to make it into something it's not--which is sparkling blue "Caribbean-esque".</p>

<p>Surely there is a happy medium between intriguing pictures and something fake?</p>

<p>OK! I think I have made a decision. It all has been incredibly helpful (even if some of you think I'm a horrible biatch for starting this thread--it wasn't just to be mean!!). </p>

<p>I think what I'll do is wait until I get out there to casually bring it up. I'll be flying out a couple days before my husband to spend some QT with my friend and help her out with last minute stuff, so it will be a good opportunity to feel her out a little more. I will also be spending a fair amount of time at some pre-wedding "events" with the photographer, so I can find a kind of casual way to broach the subject with her as well. I'll just plan to bring a camera and a couple lenses and see where it goes from there. </p>

<p>Keith and Dick, I certainly agree that friends should always be able to sort through things! But I also think she likely is being vague about the whole thing because it's also an awkward situation for her. A. I don't think she wants me to feel any real pressure (but does probably want a "backup") and B. Obviously the closeness of the other photographer to her and her fiance adds extra feelings in the mix. I'll say that me being worked up over this has nothing to do with how I think my friend will react or that she'll have any hard feelings no matter how few or many pictures that I take, or if they all stink. It's pressure I'm putting on myself wanting to help my friend out (not that I'm entirely convinced I'll be able to). I've known her for long enough and we're definitely close enough that I'm quite certain she's not directly wanting to lay things out entirely for a good reason (likely my A and B formerly).</p>

<p>I'll just let things fall into place from there. I'm definitely comfortable enough in the friendship that at the end of the day her and I will be completely fine...she won't be upset with me...and I'll be unwound enough by then to let the punches roll. It was more of a "ooooh carp!/aahaaa" moment for me. And hey, you all are right. Maybe it isn't what it seems like it is and I'm not seeing the full talent of this woman..........why she would put that quality of work out for people to see, I have no idea.....but I really shouldn't completely discount her because I don't KNOW.</p>

<p>Oh, and Nadine: No, I won't be claiming the wedding and starting a photo business tomorrow :) I don't have the nerve to have that kind of photographic responsibility, and I respect you people that do it! I'll stick to inanimate objects on my travel adventures and my dog. She doesn't care if I catch her at an odd moment! As far as if I'm good? Probably not by you pros' standards (I keep meaning to upgrade my membership so I upload an actual portfolio), but decent enough that friends and family like them. I have put some pictures in various "no words" threads if you'd like to give your overall opinion if I'm going to completely let my friend down. </p>

<p>I have to say I'm shocked that people actually go up to photographers at weddings and comment on their equipment and style. I thought my big mouth was bad enough, but that does take quite the set of balls.</p>

<p>Anyhow Keith, if you would have read my OP you would see that I'm more or less in this situation because my friend has also asked me to bring along my camera to get some shots. (what her motivation is for also specifiying I bring along my camera--that I do not know)...but at this point I'm asking to the EXTENT to do so. </p>

<p>So to answer your question: Yes, I would absolutely criticize my friend's DJ and bring along my own ipod and speakers if she asked me to do so. No, I would not do so if she never mentioned her DJ and never asked me to bring anything along. I also was fairly specific that contributing my opinion to her was not something I'm going to do.</p>

<p>I can also assure you that there is no desire to "take over." I wouldn't even know where to begin with directing people for posing and formal shots. The only reason I even threw out contacting her her is to avoid an awkward day before declaration by my friend "oh, Justine's going to be taking pictures too!" In a way I see contacting her as a bit of my way out...if she says NO I can say "sorry" to my friend and be done with it. If she says YES then i don't feel nearly as weird about the whole thing. </p>

<p>Nadine, you don't think this is the best thing? <<Probably better to take the approach that it's better to ask for forgiveness than permission and then blend into taking pictures with the other guests?>> I was kind of leaning towards the "blending into" idea....</p>

<p>David--I didn't mean to imply that your post and my post were similar other than the fact it would be someone other than the "hired" person taking the photos. It was just what got me thinking about her wedding and the photography situation. And I suppose it is a public bashing, although no more or less than your thread :-)</p>

<p>Simon--I agree with John that it's a good idea in principle...but I don't think I could really end up bringing up the subject to my friend. She knows I'm a saucy little thing and I KNOW that if I brought up seeing the other photographer's work that it would end up in her asking me about it...I fully own that I have a snarky mouth and I don't think that the conversation would end well. It would probably go something like the first post did and at this point I don't think there is anything to be gained from being my typical self. </p>

<p>Her and I have discussed wedding photography at length (as far as style and examples she loved) since she just went through the wedding planning with me a year and a half ago and she's going through it now. So at least if I decide to sit back and click away I've got a fairly clear image of the type of photos she wants. Which works out nicely as she doesn't like formals and prefers the more candid approach.</p>

<p>I was also toying around with the idea of sending the photographer a message and just saying something like "I love photography and would love to take pictures of Z and Y's wedding...would you mind if I tagged along and snapped some pictures?" But then I worry that might be another can of worms that could get opened. Probably better to take the approach that it's better to ask for forgiveness than permission and then blend into taking pictures with the other guests?</p>

<p>John and Jerry--that's what I was thinking...just do what I normally do. If I get good pictures, great. If not, no sweat. In hindsight it is what it is and my friend and her fiance made the choice together and I need not worry about it!</p>

<p>Marc--yes, I absolutely would :). I'm more than happy to admit when my first impressions are not correct. Although I would probably also add after the fact that if she is capable of getting nice shots, why not display those as a representation of her work? And I provided no information about my friend, the location, or any of the photographer's info. I hardly call it "public" blasting. </p>

<p>Perhaps I was a little harsh reflecting on it since I don't know the woman at all and am purely judging off the small body of work I've seen. I'm sure she's a nice person and has good intentions. And perhaps she comes to this website and will figure out what I'm talking about and the whole weekend will be an awkward mess. But I am also just a bit like that in general and I am who I am. </p>

<p>Last night I read and posted in this thread:<br>

<a href="../wedding-photography-forum/00XCNM">http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00XCNM</a></p>

<p>Which got me thinking about one of the few weddings I'm going to this fall. One of them is an out of town wedding of one of my closest friends who lives far, far away from me so I don't get to see her often these days. So I don't personally know the "players" involved in her wedding where they live. They are having a very small wedding--I think about 30 people.</p>

<p>I know having a good photographer was fairly important to her both before and after her engagement, as we talked about it numerous times. Her fiance, however, is extremely frugal....probably bordering on someone you would just label as "cheap" (this is said in jest, as it's always a joke about their funny compromises when she wants to buy something that he sees as pointless). I was a little surprised when my friend mentioned that they were now using the wife of her fiance's best friend, who is quote a "professional photographer." And she seemed a little hesitant about the whole thing. But I didn't think too much of it because she said the woman was doing it as a wedding present or sorts, so I figured she just didn't want to ask her previously to do it so she could enjoy the wedding with her husband...or didin't want to mix too much "business with pleasure."</p>

<p>My friend also said to me to bring my camera along to get some pictures. Last night when I saw the above thread and kind of thought "hmm, I wonder if X will be miffed if I'm taking pictures along with her for fun...maybe I should forget the whole thing since it's such a small wedding." Our of morbid curiosity, I decide to internet "stalk" this woman. To my horror she has to be, hands down, one of the WORST photographers I've ever seen. And this is coming from me--a non pro who is NOT good at capturing the spirit of people. But I'm quite confident that my completely photo ignorant friends with their iphones could capture better quality photos than what she had. I mean...not even subjective things. Completely blurry. Practical up the nose shots. Heads cut off. On and on. I seriously do not even fathom how this woman is a "professional" or gets any business.</p>

<p>So, do I take the approach that my wonderful girlfriend got herself into this situation...likely appeasing both her fiance's frugality and the awkwardness of her declining? Or do I become even a little bit more pushy and do what I can? Again, I'm not a pro. Not a great phtographer by any means and I'm not going to pretend I am. But I'm quite confident that I have the ability to get photos leaps and bounds better than what she displays (man, maybe it's a sick joke and she only puts her worst photos online???). I know my girlfriend is way too nice sometimes and would never be able to just say "no."</p>

<p>I'm asking this here and I know I'll get brutaly honest answers about your opinions on the subject. It doesn't quite fall into any of the categories, but I figured here is the most applicable.</p>

<p>Oooh. This is a very interesting thread for me as I'm definitely an amateur and I'm going to a lot of wedding this fall that I planned on using as a chance to improve my people photographing skill (which I sorely lack). I have to say, I never really thought of some of the issues that people are bringing up. I'll preface this by saying that I have seen some very annoying people at wedding acting as if they are the pros that pretty much disgust me (ok, maybe disgust is taking it a bit far) the way they shoulder into everyone's way. </p>

<p>I would certainly never do that, and when I am at a wedding I really try to stay off to the side. I have never done things like tag along when shooting formals. I've only ever walked around taking pictures of people during the reception, the cake, flowers, etc. It has never occured to me that doing something like this would be a problem with the pro, and I'm having a hard time convincing myself that it is a justifiable thing to get so worked up over it. <br>

<br />I can definitely see that if the people are getting in your way that it would be a problem. But being working up over someone not acknowledging you as the "primary shooter" on facebook? Hmmm. I'll have to mull it over, but I'm not buying it. I'm also not sure that I'll buy Booray's argument either. I've never been to a wedding where there haven't been people (relatives, wedding party, etc) taking pictures of the formal shots at the same time as the photographer. Have you really not had that happen? And if you have, I'm sure the majority of them have ended up on facebook and you were never once mentioned. I personally am not sure that that photo would be anything special at all taken by Uncle Bob and put online. Isn't the photo about composition, framing, settings, and post processing? 10 people could take that same picture all in a line and come up with completely different results at the end. </p>

<p>I genuinely just love taking pictures and being up in the action. I certainly have never had some kind of egotistical intentions while photographing and I certainly hope no pro photographer has ever gotten that impression. My goal is always for them NOT to notice me. The wedding I'm going to on Sunday is actually with the same photographer who shot my wedding. She's also photographed a charity "event" for me, so I'm semi-friendly with her. I'm kind of curious now and might bring the topic up with her for another POV.</p>

<p>Woah how does stuff like this happen that people know nothing about a subject yet have all this business booked? Shenanigans!</p>

<p>Anyhow. I can't offer anything on the photography aspect of it. But as a lifelong horse person and "photo enthusiast": do you actually have any experience photographing horses AND have been around the extensively? If you'll be in the arena with them and you aren't familiar with both, doing this event is a bit of a disaster waiting to happen. Horses are a bit unpredictable and you'll have lots of ticked off riders if you aren't quick on your feet and know where to be and when to be there. On top of that, getting good photographs of horses moving is actually extremely difficult if you aren't familiar with their movement. If you're a horse person then I guess the advice is N/A.</p>

<p>Haha, Barcelona does seem to be the hot topic!</p>

<p>I too have a Barcelona experience. It was myself, but when I was on LaRambla a nice Swedish woman was walking down the street and team of thieves tried to snatch her purse via the cut and run method. She managed to hold onto it, and I don't think they realized she was with her hotheaded Spanish husband who promptly chased one of the kids down, knocked him onto the ground, and spit on him...then everyone went on with their day.</p>

<p>It's actually a very lovely city. Crooks like the ones in this thread are everywhere. The key it to be on the lookout always. I always carry messenger style/shoulder bags that I can swing in front of me, or have it zipped up and smashed under my arm. Always watching people...I'm a horribly suspicious person (but can still find a way to be friendly :-)...and ALWAYS have my bad looped around my ankle when I'm at a restaurant or cafe. Keep the passport on your body in one of those silly inner belt things. Or leave it in the safe at the hotel and only bring copies with you. I usually have 4 or 5 copies of my passport in all my different bags.</p>

<p>This kind of thing can happen in every city in the world. And does. Often. All day every day. Small towns in the middle of nowhere...not usually as much. Less crowds don't offer crooks as many opportunities to distract people and blend in with the crowds.</p>

<p>I also caught the many mentions of the owner being a Turk :-) I personally think it's a cop out (no pun intended) by the police officers. The bottom line is for them that no violence occurred and you are indeed another sucker tourist that got your bag snatched. Not that it's right, but I'm sure they knew that the case was going to be pretty much a dead end. It's not like survellience cameras in the cafe are so great that there would be a magic image. And it's also not like they are going to be putting out some kind of police bulliten on something like this..................</p>

<p>I say don't worry about what other people have and their reasons for owning it.</p>

<p>That's how the phrase "keeping up with the Jones'" came about...and it never did anyone any good.</p>

<p>I bought a refurbed D300, but it had a battery drain problem (which was actually a semi-common issue with the D300's, I just happened to get one). Luckily, I got it from the oh-so-reliable Adorama, sent it back and within 4 days had a new one. It was a pain and there was a little miscommunication at times, but the new one seems to be working fine. I went with the D300 over the D300s purely for cost. The savings difference was astronomical for what amounts to adding an SD card slot (which, admittedly would be great since I don't have a CF card slot on my computer) and video, which I don't use. </p>

<p>I think refurbed is great as long as you're going with a good company with a good return policy. There is generally a 2 week window you can beat up on the equipment before you return it. Granted, it can always develope problems later, but then again, so can a new one.</p>

<p>So +1 for refurbished, with reservations as to knowing (with any equipment--used or new) that you might have issues that need to be worked through. </p>

<p>And good choice on the D90. You probably don't need the D300 right now. THAT on the other hand might be too overwhelming to learn on. You have it right when you say the D90 is probably the best all-around. It has all the beginner features and a ton of more advanced features that will last you a long time. The only reason I went with the D300 instead of the D90 is because I needed something that faster and had a stronger motor for action stuff (lots of moving dog and horse pictures). </p>

<p>Nick,<br>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">It's all personal, but a few things:</p>

<p dir="ltr">1. Size. I think it's small enough that it's a bit awkward to handle when you're trying to do multi-button functions (which there are a lot of on this camera). I'm a female, and I don't think it's easy to comfortably manipulate while still trying to hold with your right hand.</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">2. Durability. Compared to D90 and up, it seems very flimsy. I think if you're planning on taking it out into the outdoors, you'll notice the difference. YES. The D90 will be heavier, but that will come in use when you drop it on a backpacking trip.</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">3. Buttons. The D90 controls are much more accessible. You will appreciate those when you learn how to use them and would like to constantly be playing around with settings. I find that the D5000 is very limiting for what I can do on the back of the camera.</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">4. No "temperature" white balance abilities. I don't think cameras are all the time the best at guess WB, and "Fluorescent" "outdoor" "shade" etc doesn't always fit nicely into those niches and there is something to be said for being able to fine tune it by going up and down on the Kelvin scale</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">5. That autofocus issue with "old" lenses. Sure, everyone is saying don't worry about it. But you never know when you'll need it and it does restrict what you can choose from. Manual focusing is always a good thing to know how to do, but there might be times when you're in an awkward space and can't necessarily be looking through the viewfinder to see if it's in focus. Been there, done that. </p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<br>

These are all things the bug me beyond belief with it. I'm sure there's more, that's all I'm coming up with right now. I'm not a very good photographer, but work regularly with 4 different Nikon DSLR's, and those are my thoughts on it. I know it's easy to say that this is your starter camera, but you're looking at THREE YEARS at a possibly upgrade. If you're serious about photography and do it a lot, I think you'll find yourself growing out of a lot of the settings with the D5000. Considering the price difference isn't all that much when you average it over 3 years, I'd go with a little bit more "advanced" camera and grow into it. If you would have said you'll be looking to upgrade in 6 months, that would be one thing. But 3 years is a long time and that's a lot of learning you can do. I just think the price difference now will end up being a wash for you because you'll be wanting to get a new camera sooner that if you would have gone with the D90. Sure, IMAGE QUALITY isn't better, per say, with the D90. But it is a step-up in photographic freedom and convenience. </p>

<p>Well, gee, if you're going to go with just the kit lenses, go for the D90. It has more manual functions and will let you learn better from what I've seen. </p>

<p>The D90 isn't going to make you wish you had a D300 in 3 months, where I feel like the D5000 will (I have a D80 and a D5000 at work and I hate the 5K). If you get the D90, which will ride out developing skills a little better, then you'll have a longer time to start getting good lenses before you decide to drop 1500 on a new camera.</p>

<p>But the grandson says no?<br>

<a href="http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/matthew-adams-doubts-lost-negatives-are-grandfather-ansel-adams-works/19570601?icid=main|htmlws-main-n|dl1|link1|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aolnews.com%2Fnation%2Farticle%2Fmatthew-adams-doubts-lost-negatives-are-grandfather-ansel-adams-works%2F19570601">http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/matthew-adams-doubts-lost-negatives-are-grandfather-ansel-adams-works/19570601?icid=main|htmlws-main-n|dl1|link1|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aolnews.com%2Fnation%2Farticle%2Fmatthew-adams-doubts-lost-negatives-are-grandfather-ansel-adams-works%2F19570601</a></p>

<p>CPM,</p>

<p>No! I haven't decided. When it comes to camera equipment, I tend to be indecisive to the point of it being an annoying neuroses. I need to "borrow" the 18-200mm from work again and restrict it to some of the zoom ranges I'm considering, I think, to decide if I'd really be happy with some of the ranges I'm considering.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, I had to return the new D300 due to some issues, so I'm still waiting for the replacement to come back. </p>

<p>I need to stop fighting the 16-85, I think. Everyone keep talking about it! We'll see...it might end up in my pack! I just keep thinking that for the range it doesn't have the low-light capabilities that I want....</p>

<p>Brad...I shouldn't bash the 'daks :-)...but when you grew up scaling the mountains of the Rockies from when you could practically walk, Marcy and Algonquin just don't give you that same feeling when you're at the summit. I could be in Iowa, though, so I better keep my trap shut!</p>

<p> </p>