This is an awesome lens....pretty much my go to lens. I know you said prince wasn't really an issue, but sometimes newbies don't realize what lays ahead when they are dealing with 'L' glass. A very versatile alternative is the 18-200. Not nearly as good as the 'L' series glass, but much more affordable and very versatile. And if you pair that with a teleconverter you can pretty much cover anything you're going to shoot.

Another good thing is to carry a 50mm 1.8 lens for shooting indoor and low light. It's about $100 and will fit in your pocket.

Have you tried to use spot metering?

There are some accessories that you might want to get with it. Depending on the body and lens you use, there are different attachment bolt thingies that make your camera lay properly. If you use a tripod regularly, make sure to get the proper tripod set up. And I highly recommend the side hand straps for easy handling.

Yeah, Cotton Carrier is unbeatable. I've tried quite a few, and this one is the best so far. I can go hiking with two bodies, usually one with a 70-200, or 100-400, and the other with a 24-105. The weight is so nicely distributed and you don't get neck or shoulder fatigue. I take one of the cameras when I go mt biking and it's so sturdy and secure, yet very easy and quick to detach/attach.

I also take the cameras skiing and they are secured without much play at all.

Yeah, what he said. And there is a whole section of "help" for just about anything you'd encounter. I have made the mistake of deleting files from disk though. God thing I have multiple backups.

I have no idea where you went wrong, or really even what you're talking about, but I love Picasa. I don't use it for photo editing though.

What great Photos. I love what you did with the Frisian. What program did you use to convert to BW?

The Arab has such a sweet eye, and you captured it perfectly.

The bay is pretty bright, no? Interestingly, I've been finding that the shots that I have that are very bright/overexposed are the ones that catch people's eyes, especially ones that are not photographers. I've also be selling (and I don't even try to sell, actually) hyperstylized images that in my opinion are overdone, but people seem to love them.

Good job. Yours all look great.

I use both Mac and PC. I've never understood the reasoning that Mac is more user friendly, especially if you've been using PC for any amount of time.

The things I love about my Macs is that they start up fast, and they reboot fast, and reboots are rare. What I don't like about the Macs is that there are many programs that I use (especially for work) that don't run on the Macs.

The main thing is using your laptop as your main computer. I bring my laptop when I travel, and I will try to do my usual work flow on the laptop, but it's much more difficult on the laptop. Power and speed limitations notwithstanding, it just seems that I always have to be attaching externals onto my laptop to get comfortable, i.e., USB hubs to accommodate my Wacom tablet, camera, card readers, portable data storage, speakers, etc., whereas all that stuff is already set up for me on my desktop. Truth be told, I really hate having to perform my work flow on my laptop when I travel, and I much prefer to wait until I get home to do it. That's not to say that it can't be done on the laptop, but I much prefer it on my desktop. Now, if I only used my laptop solely for my work flow, I'd never know what I was missing, so I'd probably be very happy with just the laptop.

I have a 17" MacBook Pro, but working on my 24" or 40" monitor that I have hooked up to my desktop is much easier and productive. I've missed a few things on the laptop that became glaring once I got them on the bigger monitor. Of course, you can hookup your laptop to and external monitor of your choice, but why?

Another thing you should consider is that using the laptop is not the most ergonomically correct endeavor. Of course, you can hook up an ergo keyboard to your laptop, but again, why?

All this being said, if you're just going to use a laptop, you'd probably adapt very quickly and not even notice a difference. If $$ is a concern and you can only afford to buy one or the other, then the laptop is far more versatile, and you will be just fine with the laptop.

I couldn't agree more.

WOW, Swamp Gator. Incredible pics. Thanks.

One other thing about your 35mm for portraits, aside from the distortion. Most subjects are not comfortable with a camera that close to them, so they are unable to relax into natural poses. Setting up further back will be much more pleasing. When you consider the distortion and the awkwardness of the model, it's tough to get a pleasing portrait. However, if you are going for something edgy and unusual, move in and have fun.

Have you considered using a longer lens and perhaps setting up in your living room and using natural light?

I would have someone explain to your sister (and mother) that she shouldn't be getting married if she and her husband-to-be can't afford the wedding that they envisioned. Is you mother cooking the chicken and fish? Are your nieces and nephews serving the food too? Stick to your guns. If you're not comfortable doing wedding photography, most likely you won't do the ceremony justice. Even professional wedding photographers get it wrong.

Additionally, I wouldn't even bring a camera to the ceremony, not to be catty or nasty, but because you will probably get blamed when you show up in the background taking pics, thus ruining their favorite shot. As an alternative, how about volunteering to shoot some engagement pictures, or pictures of the rehearsal dinner? Or are you proficient in photoshop or onOne, or anything like that? You can volunteer to help tidy up some of their favorite shots after the big day.

Surprisingly, many professionals DON'T shoot RAW, especially pro sports shooters and photojournalists. Many wedding photogs don't shot RAW either.

For pro sports, the penalty of the buffer limitation is the main factor. PJ photogs often have to send their pics off to their editors from the field, thus in-camera processing is essential.

A world famous wedding photog told me he no longer shoots in RAW at weddings because why in the hell would anyone shoot a reception in RAW unless you don't know light...meaning that the lighting is going to be the same in every corresponding section of the venue so you should have readings for correct exp/wb scoped out. Additionally, nobody that hires him for a wedding can tell the difference between RAW and jpg anyway.

When I first heard this, I was stunned. But then I started asking around, and found it to be true. I then got cocky and started shooting in jpg myself, and got a fantastic shot that I just couldn't get the wb right on,. After a couple months of fiddling with it, it's still not where I want it. If I had shot it in RAW, I could have taken care of it with a click. lol.

Perfect.

Almost anything can be considered art. It just depends on how simple or sick in the head you are. Even death and poverty can be romantic, and in Black & White they look like art.

If you think that Mapplethorpe's bullwhip up a rectum is art, then more power to you. If you think a Renoir is boring, the world will continue to turn. Just don't try to make my mind up for me.