Part of what I strive to do is create the best image possible without PP. I guess that comes from my film days (hours spent in the darkroom trying for the illusive perfect print). I often wonder if today's shooters appreciate the wonder of adjusting contrast with a simple adjustment on the computer when this process used to involve picking the film, changing the chemicals, adding contrast filters, etc.

Thanks for all who chipped in. Not in a (financial) position to go FF right now-- and if I stick with Nikon, I'd have to wait anyway. I have a wonderful shop within walking distance from my house in NW Portland, OR-- they have a lot of rental gear, but almost all is Nikon or Canon-- so I'm sure my choice will be one of those.

Do you feel limited by lens choices? Perhaps you would share which ones you owns, use the most, and what kind(s) of photography you do the most of (eg. sports, landscape, macro, etc). I currently shoot Nikon & thinking of going full frame. I'm holding off on other gear because I don't want to get stuck with having to sell lenses that would vignette on a full frame sensor. Accessories are also sometimes brand/model specific and I can't afford to keep two systems

Are you referring to all gear, or is that your experience with specific camera(s)? Hmmm.... something to think about

No, but I've never had bad experiences with B&H and Adorama. Both often will include shipping unless you "need it yesterday" :)

I am curious if there are any UHH forum participants who are using FF cameras. If so, which model(s) and what led to that choice?

Thanks.

Just looks to me like another reason I need to get there!

I'm absolutely in lock-step with you on this

IMO, there are more far greater reasons to avoid this chain--than their ability (or inability) to produce quality prints

@ pawpaw: Which Nikon? Mine has the ability to shoot mirror up.

But back to the Nikon-Canon issue.... IMO it's all about "the feel" and the availability of lenses. Will you consider third party lenses? or just your brand?

B&H (and others of the ilk) make availability a "non-issue".

Agree until your last phrase regarding the camera's inability to compensate. Well, mine can compensate. I often take photos in indoor (office) settings. My camera has WB settings for lighting with different color temperatures (I believe there are four for florescent alone). I use an expodisk so I can get the green out and deliver within the hour.

I'm probably different in that I worked in video production before digital was possible. To balance lighting in indoor and outdoor sequences, we had to white balance the camera between shots. Now if you have two light source of different color temperatures: outdoor light and florescent, no camera (or software) can handle that. (In video, one would gel the window and adjust to indoor.)

This has been on "my list" for some time now. I was talking about this spot to two photo buddies today. I really don't think this place needs any color manipulation. Incredible and sensual shapes. Thanks for sharing!

Love the dunes!

Just a suggestion--in landscapes, try including elements in the foreground, middle ground, & background.

Keep sharing!

It doesn't have VR, but I would check the reviews of the Tamron 70-200 on slrgear.com. It's considerably lighter (in weight & in the wallet!)

My D300 will do 3,5,7 & 9