Aha! The proverbial fly in the ointement! So you have tried it and they lied. Still may be better for stuff that has no other backup. Use Jpeg? I have noted you can shrink a large size hi definition photo file to a tenth or so of its original size and still retain everything as far as I can see, artifacts usually seem to occur when you use extreme compression on a file that already has been lowered extremely as far as dimensions and dpi go. But that is a lot of trouble to go through for a batch of a hundred negatives. The big question here is how big is too big? What kind of compression used? All these flys where not mentioned in the original artical, it just said unlimited storage, it mentioned other systems like dropbox which does have some free storage, and the limitations of others too but this was supposed to be truly unequivical.

Thanks for the reply! I had to, in my own ignorance, google raid to find out it meant "randam array of independent discs". Oh, I wholeheartedly agree! I would not trust the cloud to be like a safe bankvault. I actually use the RAID myself as mentioned in my original statement. But I take so many photos it getting impossible to use that with all of them, I already have piles of disc books sitting around with hundreds of discs in them. And the last time someone talked of RAID as the best method other members came up with quotes on how they degrade in a few years. But this new system gives the essential base to the pyramid, or triangle as your will: computer/external hard drive storage, back up essential photos (post processed for instance, special shoots, etc, your money shots) with RAID, backup all with Cloud.

Ok, so what I read is not true. What you say is what I would have expected, but not what the news source said. I should know better about news sources these days. I will wait and see how this develops...I am hoping what I read originally was the truth...after all, it must be true if it is on the internet - (love that commercial about the French boyfriend!)

You are right in my not understanding, not that I don't agree, I don't understand what you said. It might help if you gave a footnote to your quote if that is what it and not a personal stylization, so that I could research the source and gain understanding. It makes me feel you do not like the google cloud and hope to disagree by a form of "eschew obfuscation" as we used to say back in the day.

I just read and article that said Google is introducing free, unlimited, storage space on "the cloud". It could mean we have a good alternative to having to buy an external hard drive. Personally I did not like Adobe being cloud based at first and swore I wouldn't go there but am now paying $9.99 a month for the latest photoshop and loving it. I had two external hard drives on a Mac that had thousands of photos that were lost when the computer refused to recognize the drives. It was getting old, I guess sort of computer Alzheimer's disease. Not my money shots, which I double backed up on Disc. Meanwhile I switched to PC. Now I can take my photos and back them up on the cloud, so if my external drive now in use goes up I won't be left in the cold. Hooray for Google!!!! What say ye, my fellow UHH'ers? A plot by Communists? Satan? Or a good thing?

I used to use a Tamron 28-300 on my Canons for years, always had probems at maximum range. All the advice so far was beyond my knowledge at the time, so it might be fixable. I see double imaging on the 600mm range, so it should be a motion problem and not just the soft focus problem I had.

Wheresis?

I have been pondering this kind of thing, I think what really laid it open for me was the Hubble deep space image where they aimed it at what they thought was an empty area of space, and found 1000 galaxies. What does this mean, I wonder...as opposed to in the past...did you know that before like 1928 we did not even know there were galaxies beyond our Milky Way? Thats why they are still called Nebulae, which meant a gaseous cloud, just a smudge in photos of that time. Then the red shift process of calculating distance was discovered and it became apparent that these clouds were really far off collections of stars, changing our whole concept of reality, the universe. For me it puts the Genesis story in a different light, there the creation of the earth seems to be the focus of everything: the water, the firmament, the heavens, and man. Now we know that we may not be the center of everything, and I wonder about Gods creation of life in other galaxies...God watching the Isrealites in particular seems a little more questionable, with so much to be watching over, we may be rather insignificant to God also.

"Everyone knew"??? Guess I missed the news headlines that day! I checked the reviews carefully because I was interested in just that capability of fine tuning different lenses on that camera. Nowhere was that problem mentioned that I recall... I was concerned because I noticed a small discrepency in back focusing on my D5200 and was considering an upgrade...It was pretty minor and in the end I did not want to give up the articulated live view screen which eliminated many aches and pains all over my body from trying to contort myself to look through the tiny optical viewfinder whenever I wanted an angle that wasn't straight on at eye level. Now I will give up my articulated screen when they pry my camera from my cold dead body, to paraphrase the NRA. I would like to see you submit a sample of the ruler test so we can see if you have an extreme case. Take a ruler, put a ballpoint pen or a pointer at any inch mark, hold camera at a 45 degree angle at a foot or more than the minimum focus distance, and shoot a picture. If you focus on the ballpoint pen tip and the photo shows the inch mark blurred, you can see if your camera has a back focus or forward focus problem because the sharpest mark on the ruler will be forward or behind the inch mark focused on. And it gives you the measurement of how far off it is too.

Ok, you brought it up. Explain what the shutter activator is. Like you said "Its the Thingyqueotozealite" and laugh as you watch everyone scramble in different directions trying to figure out what is a "Thingyqueotozealite"

I have the D5200 and wanted to upgrade to the 7100 solely for the advantage of adjustable focus for different lenses. For instance I thought I detected a back focus problem, where the auto focus consistently focuses a little behind the spot. You can check this by focusing on a particular spot on a ruler at 45 degree angle, and note whether the 16th mark aimed at is in focus or the ones forward or behind. Your camer should be adjustable to fix this. With my camera I found after doing actual shots my focus was superb enough to satisfy me. Your problem looks like a depth of field problem, which is controllable by using f stops like f10-f16. Also consider back button focusing where you assign a button, usually AE/AF or something like that to handle autofocus so when you use the shutter button the camera does not uncontrollably keep readjusting the focus.

Wow, that video sold me on Fisheye for Weddings! Gene Ho is a genius.

Sweet! A harp from heaven existing on earth.

If you get lucky a fisheye wedding shot could be the star of the show! But it could also strike out easily, like Babe Ruth.

Zenfolio looks good too, looks like $30 a year isn't bad. Fine Art America does the same for free: display, print/canvas printing, send to customer, you get check in the mail. Maybe less photos shown. My choice though was GoDaddy.com for a full website of all my art with my domain name, there are some fees: georgeedwardsart.com I put it together myself with template help onsite. You get to use PayPal to handle your payments, just pop in a button link. PayPal has no fees unless you make a sale, then it is like 2.5 %.