Yes... next they will be saying he speaks in complete comprehensible sentences and doesn't sniff youngsters heads and nibble on toddlers necks.

Orewellian double think at work... isn't it.

delete

Addressing a 50mm lens purchase:

Aside from the current project you have in mind, you are obviously building your lens collection.

50mm is a good all around lens to have, it mimics what the human eye sees. I see the Z lenses are a big jump between the 1.8 and the 1.2. Obviously the 1.2 gives you more mid range apertures where the lens will be sharpest... but a $1500 jump from the 1.8 ($600) to the 1.2 (+/- $2,000) 50mm is pretty steep. $600 is bad enough for a 1.8. Thats 3 times what a 50mm 1.8 DSLR Nikkor costs ($216). I was going to suggest jumping to the 1.4 ($450)- till I saw you will want Z lenses. ( unless you are good with the adapter)

I don't think I will be going to mirrorless anytime soon, all my glass is DSLR. I know you can get adapters...

RE: night /landscape photography:
I like the wide open, feel you get with wide angle for landscapes, it feels like you could stick your head in the frame and look around, where narrower zoom lenses compress details, making features to look like layers... So depending on what you want for a field of view specific to your project at hand, I'd usually grab for a wide angle for night photography/landscapes, (in the 20mm's or less),

Regardless, I would always agree that a 50 is good to have on hand.

They said decisions based on race... are r****t.

Only in an Orwellian world can you argue with that. And you have singled out "entitled" w****s... leaving out Asians like Calvin Yang*, who was turned down because he is Asian... I can understand why you h**e w****s, but why do you h**e Asians so much...?

*http://nypost.com/2023/06/29/why-i-helped-strike-down-affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court/

Imagine a world where you are judged not by the color of your skin but by the content of your character... Oh maybe thats got you personally concerned...


I think everybody's character should get a fair shot, let them lead.

Worked "instantly" for me... Just a regular ol' Instagram link. You know, the preferred app by young adults. why it didn't work for you.

Just headlines vs fact checks - wouldn't penetrate your circle jerk. You guys still think there were strippers peeing on a Russian Bed and the "Shifty" crazy eyes show.

Still film out there... a PITA but you can do it.

https://petapixel.com/where-to-buy-film/

I think a gay person who does not want to supply a service that would support specific anti-gay subjects should be able to refuse that service on those reasons. Why are you against gay business owners?

I think a Black owned ( or White for that matter) business can refuse to deliver r****t wh**ever on the grounds of creating a message (speech) .

In the case about the bakery in Colorado, it was the custom cake decorated and written on that was the problem, this gay couple were welcome to buy anything in the store, they were not refused or banished from the store... it was the fact of compelling the owner to supply a custom cake with a written message they KNEW the baker would object to. They made the issue up, because we all know, would you buy a custom baked good from anybody you knew h**ed you after watching Miss Minnie deliver her chocolate pie in "The Help"? ... They had to try and intentionally force a christian to do something they knew was against their religion to create the case- bakers are everywhere... they cherry picked the situation... that is a lie brought before the court in itself.

Pie scene : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaWfoNPDz74

Finally, a case brought before the Supreme court has been through many levels before it gets to them. They don't have to figure out that part of what is before them, just the essence of the issue to make a ruling. Like murder... don't need to prop up a body to decide if murder should be illegal.

"He is suing the school for many issues including the notion that if students grades fall along any racial lines, he must be r****t... 'When he complained about the continuous stream of racial insult directed at White faculty in the writing department, the director of the Affirmative Action Office told him that 'There is a problem with the White Race,'' the lawsuit alleged.

It added that he 'should attend 'antir****t' workshops 'until [he] gets it,' and that he might have mental health issues.'"

Here- just google it for your own media outlet. His name is Zack K. DePiero, son of Italian immigrants, and we know they weren't subject to discrimination based on their heritage.... and this happened at Penn State.

Some of these demand a subscription, but you can read the headline...

https://www.centredaily.com/news/local/education/penn-state/article276703856.html

https://nypost.com/2023/06/27/former-penn-state-prof-claims-school-said-english-language-is-white-supremacy/

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/faculty-issues/diversity-equity/2023/06/26/white-professor-resigns-alleges-reverse

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12238519/White-Penn-State-professor-sues-college-claiming-race-discrimination.html

https://www.outkick.com/penn-state-professor-says-school-forced-him-to-admit-being-white-is-a-problem/

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/06/27/pennsylvania-state-university-black-hispanic-grade-claims/

yeah, no way jet fuel could bring down a steel structure.... had to be explosives, same with building 7....Heard it all before.

https://www.inquirer.com/science/i95-philly-tanker-truck-fire-steel-20230612.html

And finally two views of WTC... back lit so you can see just how much air was in them...

Yeah, the screams if this was a "no B****s need apply" casting call to a play about - well pick the Black story here... Lets pick a play... "I Have A Dream" all white cast.

I am all for using the correct ethnic background of people playing historic roles- but it is Hollywood/Broadway .... so I can see two sides to this. But to say this isn't r****t, doesn't know the meaning of the word - but there is a lot of that going around. And the laugh is that Latino's are only non-white when the situation is convenient...

https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/hamilton-casting-call-wording-backlash-white-casting-call/story?id=38053630

(Download)

ROFL.... you go with that. Ethical??? this isn't a religion, though people who become zealots may disagree.

The OP isn't presenting a situation of a choice, just if this choice is a good one. In inclement weather, or holding a camera at arms length to compose an image, in challenging and or precarious conditions, poor lighting, etc. etc. a reporter would typically encounter, means that a DSLR has many very important advantages.

Producung the image file that the D800e does means that it is more than viable, it is probably overkill, but you can always sample down. Some of the very finest images I have had the pleasure or art directing came from a format camera onto 4x5 chromes... I felt no moral dilemmas in presenting and using these for my clients, some of which are still being used today, the images are superior ... rofl. If the situation presented itself, I would have no problem putting my head under the cape and checking an upside down image on frosted glass...

So to answer the OP, the D800 will produce excellent images, overkill perhaps, and memory eating... She can set it to act like a simpler camera, smaller images, or where it chooses shutter and aperture and ISO, or as she progresses and learns, she can wean herself up to full manual. Those lenses will work on any Nikon, and with a simple adapter, onto a mirrorless if she choses to go to, in fact the lenses would be what I would be most interested in... Fine glass is fine glass, that camera will accept any Nikon glass back tot he 50's, but it will really take advantage of the upper tier of lenses... like Zeiss and the Nikkor FX range... and most importantly, will not hold her back as she progresses. IF a good price , than go for it! You can always add a body down the road. Your lens collection will remain.

This reminds me of the joke about the woman who borrowed her husbands fishing boat to read in peace while floating on a lake. She was approached by a game warden, who asked to see her fishing license... she had none, "but I was just reading" she said " wasn't fishing at all." "But you have all the necessary equipment right here in the boat" and he wrote her a ticket. .... So she charged him for rape citing the same evidence.

So while I simply don't get "sex" between unconsenting humans no matter what their age, or if staged.... or for me, even if role play... and including children is likewise so foreign to me that I can't comprehend it... and for that matter, a whole lot of things some people seem to find gratifying... This is tantamount to thought crime.... " you were thinking of robbing that bank, you are driving a Lamborghini" ... "you read this book, you watched this film, you attended this rally"...(1500's) "You are a witch!"

Question is; Who was hurt, who was threatened, who was harmed? The court system lets people off far too often, who are guilty of all of these actual crimes... Imagine if you were subject to arrest for dreaming of doing something... the thoughts that you'd never follow through, nor ever did, isn't considered. Tarantino makes livid scenes of horrific crimes-stuff only a sick mind could come up with... he should be behind bars- right?

Guess it's up to the judge, or mob rule by outing them... what could go wrong?

I've heard the arguments against a protective filter... I know people who throw away their lens caps! Not having one leaves less options. THe top of the line filters do not adversely affect photographs according to the top experts and tests in various reviews/articles in leading magazines on this very subject on all but a few very specific occasions. So thats a crap excuse. I have heard the " why add a cheap piece of glass in front of my expensive pieces of glass"... well a flat filter costs a lot less to make, using the finest glass there is, so you can't judge by cost of a filter vs. a lens- heck you want them to charge $2g's for a filter? They could, that would dispel that argument... so that too is a crap argument.

I saw the suggestion if shooting with a filter on, that you should make sure the filter is clean... This is up there with making sure your battery isn't dead. Capt obvious will tell you that if your UV filter is dirty, and they certainly do get dirty, even scratched, that means the lens and its delicate coatings are not. And no moisture from spray or condensation spots on it, or dog nose prints or kid fingerprints, or sneeze spots... And if it is dirty, I need a shot right then... I can remove it and wha-la, a perfectly clean lens!

So I have a protective filter on every lens.. the good ones ain't cheap!, But neither are my Zeiss Milvus primes and Nikkor FX lenses. But the front element on each, appear as brand new, right this second...

While liberal men don't want to scratch their nail polish...

Raw vs Jpeg is a work flow comparison. Your egret may be a bit heavy on lightening and flattening your shadows. your bird will look whiter and more dramatic against a darker details... too often, damn Lightroom pulls you into making rash corrections, I went nuts over some of the new sliders when they first appeared like dehaze and clarity and detail! Then I went back a relooked.. ugg!....

HOWEVER! My point isn't what you did, or if it was great or bad, it is all about what you can do in the future. As RAW processing is non-destructive, you can go back and revisit the image forever! Re expose it so to speak! SO as you mature and get better, change your tastes in retouching, a favorite old photo can be reworked and reflect your current abilities and are not lost.

With JPEG, which is merely a destructive compression algorithm, every time you make an adjustment and save it, it overwrites your original image, and it runs the image through the compression algorithm and applies a level of pixel averaging which works by being destructive, there is no argument, even on its most subtle setting - pixels are changed, subtle color info is lost again to an image that already was compressed in camera. So an image that was saved many times has degraded, subtle info ( which is detail) between each pixel has been changed. You can save duplicates I guess, but the information in each pixel captured was dropped in camera to 8 bits, as opposed to 12 or 14 bits ) - That grey in one pixel is ever so slightly different than the grey pixel next to it, and Lightroom can coax out detail from this- where in jpeg, both grey were made to same to save memory size. . (Photoshop says 16bit, has to do with how computers save & process files- but the images are typically 12 or 14 bits in RAW actually 15 +1 but that is getting way technical) ...

Jpeg does a pretty fantastic job, but you can't do what you can do with a RAW image file- but you can make. jpeg out of a raw file.


Welcome to large hard drives that will fill up with large digital negative NEF or CR2, DNG format images, LOL good thing they are pretty cheap now huh?