chuck -

<p>RAW files have no in-camera sharpening applied, and are always "soft" until post-processed. You don't say how you are viewing the files since Lightroom wouldn't load. Try your Canon software or convert to DNG.</p>

<p>Don't let your suitcase size make the decision! With the caliber of equipment you are talking about, buy a case that can accommodate the proper tripod/head and pay the extra baggage fees. Buying an insufficient tripod is the greatest waste of time, money, and fun ever.</p>

<p>Patrick- There is something seriously wrong with your printer or your math. I also use a MkII, and have much better cost results..<br>

First, you will not use a "full set of new Canon inks" to print 36 4X6 prints. The Red, Green, and Black tanks should last for 100's of prints - maybe 5% consumed for 36 landscape prints. The Yellow , Cyan, and Magenta tanks - maybe 8%. The Photo Magenta and Photo Cyan are the highest consumed. Assuming $110 for a fresh set of all cartridges, I would say I run 30-40 cents per 4X6, not counting the cost of paper (which is included in your local shop quote).<br>

So, yes, printing at home costs more. But not that much more. And certainly not $3 for a 4X6, or even a 8.5X11!<br>

These comments are based on using Canon cartridges only...</p>

<p>+1 for Ellis' comment - something is not right with your printer and/or driver set up. 36 4x6 (same as 9 8.5x11) is ridiculous for a set of carts. Red, Green, Black last for >100(s). Photo Magenta and Photo Cyan are the fastest consumed, but still last much more than you are reporting. FWIW, my Pro 9000 MkII was an early production unit. Check your drivers, ICC profiles, printer settings, etc. Good Luck</p>

<p>In Photoshop CS6, go to the File tab, then Automate, then Contact Sheet II. In versions earlier than CS6, it is there but I can't remember if it is under File or Edit...</p>

<p>Far too many of these HDR debates confuse HDR with TONE MAPPING. While many HDR compositions benefit from some tone mapping, the practice of extreme tone mapping rendering comical results is a whole different subject.<br>

An indoor picture of a room, with a large window, can be rendered in HDR as your eye would see it - the room "exposed" properly, and the scene outside the window "exposed" properly. Without HDR, the room would be black or the window would be blown out. Not real at all. We photographers could explain the "why" all day, but our audience would only think "bad picture"!<br>

Using HDR is a skill that must be mastered. Heavy-handed users of tone mapping have given the skill a bad reputation. Some of the best HDR shooters out there are real estate photographers shooting for multi-million dollar sellers' catalogs. Check them out!<br>

HDR can be the most realistic composition possible, or the worst. It depends on the artist.</p>

<p>Best: EF 70-200mm f/4.0 IS L ; close runner-up would be the EF 100mm macro. Both are excellent.<br>

Worst: EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 non-L something-or-the-other, purchased 10 years ago, cheap. Couldn't take a sharp picture with it EVER, at any f-stop. Junk.</p>

<p>And then there is the issue of the print media and impact on the image - rag paper, glossy, matte, etc. There can be a considerable influence on the final offering...</p>

<p>What Andrew has described has been occurring for the last few weeks, when I don't do a subscriber log-in (using IE10). If I log in, the issue disappears.... My first thought was that it was an intentional annoyance for non-subscribers.</p>

<p>Hoodman Steel UDMA Reader for USB 3.0. Very, very fast.</p>

<p>Interesting to note that most of the contributors to this thread are longer-term, paying subscribers... Pnet, take note...</p>

<p>I recently discovered that 2 CDs I burned in 2000 have had the labels come completely free of the disk. Upon opening the jewel cases, the labels curled up into tight rolls, leaving behind a clear plastic disk. The data, of course, is on the backside of the label!<br>

Both CDs were "name-brand", but not Gold. They were also from the same batch. So it could have been a brand problem, a batch problem, or ??? The CDs have been in my home office the entire time - no high/low temperatures, etc.<br>

This has certainly tempered my trust of optical disks. Multiple hard drive backups is my answer.</p>

<p>I disagree that having primary and backup drives in the same chassis is nuts. (RAID has proponents, too!) It is a fast, easy way to insure against primary drive failures. As for fire, floods, etc., that is what the redundant external backups are for. I'm absolutely +1 with the routine Sara Fox describes, except I don't use SyncToy. One external copy is kept elsewhere in the house, and one in the safe deposit box at the bank.</p>

<p> OK, I tried to stay out of this thread, but...<br>

How did the subject of RAW files ever come up? Most clients wouldn't know a RAW file from a cucumber... How did the client even know RAW files existed? Did you offer that info?<br>

With RAW files being in proprietary formats, how would a client expect to have the software to deal with them? Did the client ask for DNGs? Anything?<br>

You did not have a contract that explicitly stated what your deliverables were. Bad decision.<br>

I like Gary Hook's response - except $4500 is too cheap!<br>

</p>

<p>Any EF-S lenses you use on the 40D will NOT be usable on the 1D. Any EF lenses you use on the 40D can be used on the 1D. EF-S lenses are limited to APS-C sensor cameras. EF lenses can swing both ways.</p>

<p>Great memories, Ed-<br>

I bought my first Canon in 1973 also, and it was also a FTbQL - but I got the f1.4 50mm chrome-nose. Otherwise, the camera is identical to your photos. I still have the camera, and yes, the original hot shoe protector! Unfortunately, the last time I used it (17 years ago), the negatives were pretty much blown out - suggesting a light leak or a dragging shutter... I don't remember my diagnosis. Maybe someday I will clean her up and try again.</p>

<p>Thanks for the input, everybody. Sounds like I'm not alone. I might try Marvin's approach and just "learn to live with it."</p>

<p>I didn't realize that this was a "known issue" when I posted my question. However, I can't find any threads on fixing it. </p>

<p>The zoom-lock ring on my EF 100-400mmf/4.5-5.6L IS USM lens is not as "tight" as it was when new. Now, I can barely feel when it is at the tightest point. I am getting some lens creep at steeper angles of use. Does anyone know of a way to adjust the "tightness" of the locking ring? The lens is so perfect otherwise, I would hate to have Canon Repair disassemble it! Thanks for any tips!</p>

<p>My vote goes to "waste of time and money." None of my Canon DSLRs show any significant scratching, going all the way back to my original 20D. All of my cameras travel in bags, on straps, in weather, etc. Maybe there is some microscopic scratching going on that I haven't noticed, as all I really use the LCDs for is watching the histogram and "blinkies". I can't imagine a use for the LCD that would be affected by almost transparent scratches. I think the sellers of screen protectors have an incredibly high gross profit margin interest to protect!</p>

<p>Bumper Stickers - I remember as a kid making a family trip down the I-75 corridor in Dad's new 1968 Country Squire. We got stickered in the parking lots of Ruby Falls, Underground Lake, etc., etc. and Dad was really not happy about it. Those stickers on hard-chrome bumpers were almost impossible to remove - I know, because removing them was my job. Todays cars with painted plastic bumpers would be seriously damaged by the stickers, so they don't do it anymore. Bumper Stickers, like pointy breasts, had their day. </p>

<p>That's a real good summary given by Bob Flood -<br>

You might also want to consider a visit to Sedona (red rock country) and Jerome, both a short drive south of Flagstaff. Also, while you are in Durango, a ride on the Durango/Silverton narrow gauge railroad has some great photo ops.<br>

You're in for a great photo trip!</p>

<p>I believe the Digilux 2 is limited to 2gb cards, as it was designed around the older SD standard.</p>

<p>I've got a divided opinion on this - on the one hand, I think it is great that so many people are now taking pics with whatever they have - cell phones or whatever - at one point 10-15 years ago, I thought picture taking by the masses was all but doomed. <br>

But I also have to +1 with Patrick S that consumers of event photography are accepting lower standards, not expecting (or are ignorant) of anything more. It isn't much fun to compete when you have $5,000 of equipment in your hand and everyone in the front row has a free cell phone in their hand... and the buyer sees no difference.<br>

Things have changed - and new paradigms are evolving. Expertise seems to have a shrinking market in so many areas...</p>

<p>I'm going to throw some cold water on the CD/DVD crowd here - I recently discovered 2 CDs from different mainstream manufacturers, burned in 2002, that had their OEM labels "curling off" (for those of you who don't know, your data is on the back of those OEM labels!!!). The CDs had been in the air-conditioned comfort of my computer room for all of those years. Fortunately, I've used multiple hard drive backups for years now. I'll never archive anything on optical discs again - and I've retro backed up anything remaining on old discs. </p>