Posts: CSI Dave | Ugly Hedgehog

Don't dismiss the Sigma lens you already have. If it's the new 17-50 f/2.8 OS, it's quite a good one. If you trade it in for a super-zoom such as the 18-200, you get the extra reach (which is nice) but might regret not having the faster f/2.8 capability. Also, I can't speak regarding the Canon 18-200, but the Sigma I mention here is sharper than the Nikon 18-200.

As far as the body upgrade to the t3i, either do it right away or stick with what you have for the trip. Bring whatever you practiced your 3000 shots with. As others have said, you want to be comfortable with your equipment, not fumbling around for settings with brand new camera when you want to grab a shot.

My 2 cents.

(Main Photography Discussion)

Sensor

greg14 wrote:

I have the Nikon D7000 that has a Image sensor cleaner.

Am I missing something, is there another sensor that needs cleaning and has to be done professionally?
OR is the feature a cheap gimmick?

I realize that the older DLSR's may not have this feature.

Thanks

Greg

The sensor cleaning feature you mention (also in my D300) tries to vibrate/shake the dust off of the sensor. It seems to be effective, but if you get anything sticky on it you might need a wet cleaning. So, it's not a gimmick, but not always 100% effective.

(Main Photography Discussion)

Need help on a camera bag recommendation. Please

R Crawford wrote:

I have a "photo vest" potentially it will be ideal.

The biggest problem is,.... it has 21 pockets, I have a 10 pocket brain.

Maybe you should load up one of those pockets with extra memory cards, that should help your brain. ;)

(Main Photography Discussion)

Full Frame Camera

I agree with some of the speed issues you mention, but your pricing comparison is way off. The D800 sells for $2999, which is certainly not $1000 more than the $2900 you quote for the used 1D mk IV.

SharpShooter wrote:

Dallas, neither would shoot sports/action very wel... (show quote)

(Main Photography Discussion)

Home Network

I have two Windows 7 PCs that connect using the homegroup, but I can't help you with a mixed Windows/Mac environment. If you run out of patience, you might consider using a network attached storage (NAS) drive. It's basically the external hard drive solution, but you attach it to the router just like another computer. Once configured, any computer on the network can access the centralized storage. It's a bit more elegant than carrying around an external drive from room to room.

(Main Photography Discussion)

Topaz software suite

jerryc41 wrote:

Thanks for the info. I'll look for their seminars and demos.

I have the Topaz B&W plug-in, so far I like it. I didn't want to deal with the seminars to get a discount, so I simply did a Google search for Topaz discounts. Turns out there were a lot of photography websites with links to really good deals/promotions, usually much better than the 15% direct from Topaz. That was a few months ago, I'm not sure what the current deals are.

(Main Photography Discussion)

$400 Off Photoshop CS6

gmcase wrote:

quote=CSI Dave quote=Wendy2 quote=CSI Dave I ju... (show quote)

Thanks, gmcase. I definitely would do the upgrade route for myself if I go with CS6. Really, the only reason I posted all of this was because fellow hoggers wanted to know if similar CS6 discounts became available. I got my notice, so I let everyone know that they have another option (maybe). As for me, I'm trying to maximize using Lightroom 4 before I decide to spend more money on Photoshop. Cheers!

(Main Photography Discussion)

Ken Rockwell

Thom S wrote:

Ken totally down plays zoom lenses as less useful than primes and if you need to zoom in, just walk closer to the subject. I hope he doesn't plan to photograph bears in Alaska any time soon.

:thumbup: That's exactly the type of thought that goes through my mind whenever I hear the "zoom with your feet" comments by the 50mm prime purists. I have and love a good normal prime, but not for every situation.

...also, then he will do a 180 and recommend the Nikon 18-200 as the only lens you need. (Link to B&H or Adorama included just as a public service)

(Main Photography Discussion)

$400 Off Photoshop CS6

Wendy2 wrote:

CSI Dave wrote:

I just got the $400 Off deal through B&H today.

In response to people who are having a hard time getting the code accepted, my guess is that you must buy through the link in the email offer, then enter the discount code. B&H's instructions refer to it as my "unique" promo code. Not sure about the Amazon order process, though.

What was the total you paid? Which CS6 did you get?

I haven't purchased it. The deal is for the full version of CS6, mac or windows, and a free tutorial DVD (supposedly worth $49.95). The final price would be $249, so it seems like a pretty good deal. I have CS5, so I'm not sure I need CS6.

(Main Photography Discussion)

$400 Off Photoshop CS6

I just got the $400 Off deal through B&H today.

In response to people who are having a hard time getting the code accepted, my guess is that you must buy through the link in the email offer, then enter the discount code. B&H's instructions refer to it as my "unique" promo code. Not sure about the Amazon order process, though.

(Main Photography Discussion)

Ken Rockwell

apache wrote:

I've got to check Thom Hogan's site I suppose...

Not everyone will like his ongoing analysis of the corporate business decisions of Nikon (and other companies), but his reviews are very detailed and informative. He also regularly has teaching points and assignments to help make us better photographers.

(Main Photography Discussion)

Ken Rockwell

MT Shooter wrote:

LOL
Thats exactly what he WANTS you to think!!
Ken is a good, experienced photographer, but has a VERY high opinion of himself and once he has formulated an opinion, right or wrong, no one will change his mind. Overall I give him 3.5 out of 5 stars, thats half a star over Thom Hogan though.

I give Hogan a much better rating than Rockwell.

(Main Photography Discussion)

Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 vs 80-200 f/2.8

devolution wrote:

Calling all you Nikonians. Need help, please. Besides the VR and range, is their enough difference to justify over twice the cost? Thanks. OK, GO!

Good question, I've wondered this myself. I own the old 80-200 (push-pull zoom), got a mint condition one on ebay for $450. It's surprisingly sharp. Focus is slower and noisier than the new ones, but I'm still able to get perfect-focus action shots. I've also used the newer 80-200 (two ring design, no VR). It focuses faster and quieter, but it's tough to see much difference in the optics. I haven't used the 70-200, so of course my Lens Acquisition Syndrome keeps urging me to upgrade just to find out how good it is. My wallet, though, has been telling me to wait. ;-)

(Main Photography Discussion)

Looking for an assistant?

You also may want to join the "3PG" group on facebook (Phoenix Photographers Practice Group) . It's hit and miss, but there are often requests for second shooters or assistants.

(Main Photography Discussion)

Sigma or Tamron?

cherylpeters wrote:

I was wondering what your thoughts are on a Sigma or Tamron 17-55 mm f/2.8 lens would be, what is the best of the two. I have a kit lens but I want a lower F stop also.
Thanks

I Have the Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS, it's a fantastic lens. I you don't need image stabilization, I hear the older version of the Tamron is very good, and cheaper.