I recently saw a 20 x 30 taken with a digital Haselblad and it was the sharpest and most vibrant picture that I have ever seen in my over 50 years of photography. I know photography is subjective but this was just an unbelievable image. It was taken at The Museum of Science & Industry at Chicago. I have owned a Hasselblad and image quality is truly excellent but that is primarily due to the fine Zeiss lenses that are used with the cameras. I blew images up to 16 x 20 using ASA 25 film but got nothing to approach the image I saw.

I usually reformat my memory cards after I erase them in the camera. The memory cards I use in one of my cameras I have been using at least 4 years and they have never given me a problem. These are compact flash cards in a Canon Rebel XT. I use them just about everyday. They are 1GB Kingston cards that I got at Tiger. I was told like the other commentors that the images will remain on the card if you just erase them. If you reformat the cards the images are completely gone.

I would get an entry level DSLR. Depending on how deep you want to get into photography I would go into either Nikon or Canon because they have the largest systems. Popular Photography recently did a test on the Canon T3 and gave it very good reviews and it is ablout $600. That includes the kit lens which is an 18-55 IS lens which is all you need to get started with. With digital you can learn instantly what you are doing wrong. There is no film to load or to get processed. This will eleminte the problems that you encountered with the Pentax K1000. This, by the way, is an excellent camera to begin with if you were starting out with film. But with digtal you can see the difference when you change shutter speeds and F stops immediately. You also have a lot of automatic modes to use so you will get a descent picture such as program and fully automatic. Invest in a flash that is compatible with whatever camera system that you start with. That is very important.

I think your images are beautiful. With the flower I would try to shoot at a samller F-stop like about F22 if you are able to adjust your camera. Overall the images are great. I love especially the picture of the humming bird.

I use primarily Canon products but any point and shoot with a good lens and a real viewfinder is OK. I have a Canon SD1100 elph camera that I have had for about 3 years. I prefer a camera with a viewfinder because this is what I am accustomed to using. Trying to use a LCD screen in bright sunlight is very difficult. I shot a burial for a friend of mine and the pictures really came out great. I didn't bring my DSLR because I had no idea that I would be doing any photography but at the last minute she asked me could I take a few pictures of her father's burial. If you're a photographer you always have a camera.

I you are using Lilghtroom 3, the 64 bit version, you have to export your pictures to another location on your computer like Elements or some other location on your computer. I send mine to my pictures library and from there I burn a CD and can e-mail them to someone. I can't give you all the techinal terms because I am still learning how to do this.

I you are using Lilghtroom 3, the 64 bit version, you have to export your pictures to another location on your computer like Elements or some other location on your computer. I send mine to my pictures library and from there I burn a CD and can e-mail them to someone. I can't give you all the techinal terms because I am still learning how to do this.

I have seen the specs on the 60D and the 7D. They are both quite impressive but you get almost as much with the Rebel T2i and T3i for about $600.00 less. Again this is decided by what you are going to use the camera for, (making money),(?) and above all how much do you want to spend and how important the images are to you.

Once you get into professional camera the smallest you are going to get would be the Canon 5DMkII (21Megapixels full frame) or the Nikon D700 (24Megapixels full frame). These are both about $2,500. You still need to buy a quality lens to put on it and that won't be light or cheap. As someone said earlier is that you won't have bolth worlds, light and cheap and professinal camera. The Nikon D3s and the Canon 1DMkIII are the two top selling professional cameras. They are both $5,000 plus and weigh about 3 pounds. As I have said earlier in these discussions decide what you are going to use the camera for and depending on your budget, shop around.

I would much rather view a great image from an excellent photographer that was taken with an average lens than a poor image from a "not so good" photographer with a great lens. It is the craftsman that did the work, not the tools that were used. The tools can help improve the product but the greatest tool that has ever been created was the human mind.

There is no problem if the lens you are buying is actually better. I read Popular Photography and read the lens test and for the most part you do not see a significant improvement until you get past an enlargement of 11 x 14, and even then it depends on what F stop you are shooting it at. I have been a professional photographer for about 30 years, have owned Hasselblad's with Zeiss lenses and learned that I did not see a difference even with the Hasselblad until I went to 16 X 20 or larger. Herbert Keppler, who was a senior editor with Popular Photography, stated exactly what I just said earlier. The Canon "L" lenses and the top of the line Nikor lenses do give you additional sharpness but only when you enlarge at 16 X 20 or larger. This is based on the lens test of Popular Photography Magazine which has probably the most stringent test of lenses of any authority. There were a few instances where a kit lens actually did better in their test than a lens costing twice as much. In most cases you are going to get more quality with a 70-200IS L lens that you paid $2300 dollars for but again you are paying more for the durability of the lens than the optical superiority. The pro lenses are like the pro bodies. They are weather sealed and made to last a lot longer. If you are using a lens in the heat of the desert or the cold of the mountains then you need a pro lens. Another thing that people don't realize is that various news agencies buy these lenses for their photographers and Canon & Nikon give these lenses to these professional photographers to advertise their lenses. That is why you see all those long white lenses at sports events, Canon "L" lenses. If you can afford top flight glass, by all means buy them. As I said I owned Hasselblads and the chepest lens I had was $1200. But for the average photographer a lens that cost $300-$500 is usually adequate. Most photographers do not have customers buying 20 X 30 prints. I have shot daily with a kit lens for the last 4 years and have had good results. I have not blown many images up that were very large, normally no larger than an 8 X 10. For things that are critical I have a 17-85S Canon lens on my 20D that I use for portraits and weddings. All of my friends are professional photographers and some use mostly pro lenses and some don't. As I said all of this I learned from reading Popular Photography and found this to be true in my own experience. Herbert Keppler addressed the issue of fixed apertue lenses which are very expensive and floating aperture lenses which are much cheaper and basically stated what you find out by studying the lens test and that is at F8, 11, you will get a decent print from a fairly good lens with a floating aperture. These are my experiences and research. If you can read some of Herbert Keppler's old articles from Popular Photography do so. They are a wealth of information.

A lot has to do with the program you use to convert the original file. Also to get really good B&W you need to shoot is raw and get all of the information. Also it depends on who prints the original file. Some printers cannot not give you the tonal gradation of the image as you processed it.

I have an 18-55 Canon kit lens and think it is adequate. I have had things blown up to 16x20 with very little distortion. On the other hand I have seen images taken with long zooms from some of the independent lens makers that left of a lot to be desired. Needless to say I am not talking about Shneider, Leitz, or Zeiss. I have other Canon lenses but I have been using my 18-55 kit lens a lot and have found it to be pretty good. I also have a 17-85s lens that is excellent. I have a 5D and I use a 28-105 3.5, 4.5 on that camera. A lot has to do with what F stop you shoot the lens at. If you shoot at about F-8 at a 60th you will get good shots. I shoot primarily manual with flash of people at a 30th of a second.

Go to your settings and go to aperture priority and set the camera at F-22 and see what shutter speed the camera recommends. If the shutter speed is less than 1/60th of a second knock your ISO up until you get 1/60th of second. On your dial you should see a setting that says AV which means aperture value. Look in your manual and it should explain this to you. Every time you double your ISO your shutter speed move up 1 stop. If you are at ISO 100 at a 30th and you go to ISO 200 you can shoot at a 60th.

Always shoot at an angle. Rule of thumb is if you can see your reflection you are not at the angle you need to be. You can also use a polarizer to take reflections out of glass but you will lose a stop of light) depending on how much you turn the polarizer. You will see the effect if you have DSLR. A polarizer is a filter to go on your lens. They are fairly expensive. What I talked about at the beginning is using a flash or portable light source. The polarizer won't help is you are using flash. Like someone said earlier you need to use a light tent that will give you even diffused lighting like shooting on a cloudy day.