Sakthisagar
05-10 12:37 PM
well discussion is always welcome but do you mean that by discussing in the forums, you will have an effect on what will happen to the bill in the senate?i am all for any steps that will have a direct or indirect impact on the future of the bill. but do you really think that by arguing and debating with each other about what should happen will have any impact on the future of the legal immigration??
I do not think anybody here is a great political personality who is having a voice in the senate or congress, YOu know which forum you are in IV is lobbying and trying to make changes in the bill by lobbying and helping the immigrant communities, so ideas comes from debating and discussing that is the democractic way. Even lot of threads immigrationvoice hosted for ideas alone. so open your eyes. Dont wait to make effect in senate alone, but a combined effort by all of us will do.
I do not think anybody here is a great political personality who is having a voice in the senate or congress, YOu know which forum you are in IV is lobbying and trying to make changes in the bill by lobbying and helping the immigrant communities, so ideas comes from debating and discussing that is the democractic way. Even lot of threads immigrationvoice hosted for ideas alone. so open your eyes. Dont wait to make effect in senate alone, but a combined effort by all of us will do.
wallpaper Bandera de Perú
drsilver
July 5th, 2006, 05:27 PM
OK, I've got it all figured out. (I confess, I've got nothing figured out, but it felt good to write that.)
Spent the long weekend reading up on this digital camera stuff and I've decided to go Nikon. Made this decision because I've got a relationship with their systems and some good, old glass that can still be used. Maybe not the best situation with new technology, but certainly not useless.
My quandary now is whether to go with a new D200 or a good used D70. In the past, that would have been an easy decision. When these were the tools of my trade, I was always shooting with one-generation-old technology. When everyone else was shooting with F3s, I used F2s. When the F4 came out, I snatched up a couple of discarded F3s. Made plenty of fine pictures that way.
My concern now is the pace of technology change. Digital photography is in its infancy. One reviewer's opinion is that 1 digital year is about 25 human years. So, 4-year-old digital technology is from the stone age.
Is that really true? It sounds like the D70 is a pretty good, battle-tested box which, over the last few years, has made a ton of perfectly fine images. Is it worth spending twice the money to get the newest and bestest?
One thing that caught my eye is that it sounds like the D200 is quite a bit sturdier than its older brother. I used to beat the snot out of my equipment back in the day, so that was important. Now, probably, not so much. I did read, though, that all the buttons and doors and every possible opening in the D200 is gasket sealed. I live in Seattle, so any camera I own is gonna get rained on. That's a big selling point for me.
I also read that the D200 will also work a little better with my old manual-focus lenses; mainly in the metering department. But neither will let you swap out the viewfinder glass, so I'm stuck with straight ground glass. That was never easy to focus on and my eyes aren't any younger. Guess I'll eventually be investing in at least a few AF lenses.
Tip (or rant, depending on your disposition) Of the Day
(I'm trying to give as much as I take on the board):
As far as camera metering is concerned, it doesn't interest me all that much. If you're at all serious about photography, get yourself a hand-held incident meter. I looked on Ebay yesterday and they're giving them away. You can get a Minolta Autometer IIIF for around $50 or a Flashmeter IV for less than $100. This is the most indispensable piece of equipment I own.
All camera meters are reflective. Personally, I want to know how much light is falling on the bridge of my subject's nose. Skin tones vary tremendously, so I'm not as interested in how much is bouncing back.
No matter how sophisticated a camera's metering system, it's still giving you some kind of a reflective average of some part of the scene. That's usually a good-enough approximation, but it's not exactly what you're looking for. You're better off exposing for the light coming in and letting the reflections take care of themselves. 90% of the time, there will be one part of the scene that you want to expose exactly correctly. The rest can be taken care of by looking in the viewfinder. If there are highlights that are going to blow, move your subject or yourself to an angle that either eliminates them or complements you point of emphasis. When all else fails, you can fix extremes with post-processing.
I've heard folks say that using a hand-held meter is too cumbersome. Takes too much time in fast-moving situations. I call BS. Figuring out whether to use matrix metering or center weighted or 10 or 3 or 1 degree spot or histograms or whatever, then trying to guess what the camera is thinking. That's cumbersome.
I was a photojournalist and shot more than my share of all kinds of action. I always had time to take 5 seconds to get a good incident reading. If you're indoors, walk over and take a reading by your subject. If you're outdoors, stand in light similar to your subject. (No matter how far you are from your subject you're both pretty much the same distance from the sun.)
Anyway, back to my original question. Are there any D70 users out there willing to share their thoughts on this box? Has anyone upgraded to a D200? How did it work out?
Thanks again,
--ken
Spent the long weekend reading up on this digital camera stuff and I've decided to go Nikon. Made this decision because I've got a relationship with their systems and some good, old glass that can still be used. Maybe not the best situation with new technology, but certainly not useless.
My quandary now is whether to go with a new D200 or a good used D70. In the past, that would have been an easy decision. When these were the tools of my trade, I was always shooting with one-generation-old technology. When everyone else was shooting with F3s, I used F2s. When the F4 came out, I snatched up a couple of discarded F3s. Made plenty of fine pictures that way.
My concern now is the pace of technology change. Digital photography is in its infancy. One reviewer's opinion is that 1 digital year is about 25 human years. So, 4-year-old digital technology is from the stone age.
Is that really true? It sounds like the D70 is a pretty good, battle-tested box which, over the last few years, has made a ton of perfectly fine images. Is it worth spending twice the money to get the newest and bestest?
One thing that caught my eye is that it sounds like the D200 is quite a bit sturdier than its older brother. I used to beat the snot out of my equipment back in the day, so that was important. Now, probably, not so much. I did read, though, that all the buttons and doors and every possible opening in the D200 is gasket sealed. I live in Seattle, so any camera I own is gonna get rained on. That's a big selling point for me.
I also read that the D200 will also work a little better with my old manual-focus lenses; mainly in the metering department. But neither will let you swap out the viewfinder glass, so I'm stuck with straight ground glass. That was never easy to focus on and my eyes aren't any younger. Guess I'll eventually be investing in at least a few AF lenses.
Tip (or rant, depending on your disposition) Of the Day
(I'm trying to give as much as I take on the board):
As far as camera metering is concerned, it doesn't interest me all that much. If you're at all serious about photography, get yourself a hand-held incident meter. I looked on Ebay yesterday and they're giving them away. You can get a Minolta Autometer IIIF for around $50 or a Flashmeter IV for less than $100. This is the most indispensable piece of equipment I own.
All camera meters are reflective. Personally, I want to know how much light is falling on the bridge of my subject's nose. Skin tones vary tremendously, so I'm not as interested in how much is bouncing back.
No matter how sophisticated a camera's metering system, it's still giving you some kind of a reflective average of some part of the scene. That's usually a good-enough approximation, but it's not exactly what you're looking for. You're better off exposing for the light coming in and letting the reflections take care of themselves. 90% of the time, there will be one part of the scene that you want to expose exactly correctly. The rest can be taken care of by looking in the viewfinder. If there are highlights that are going to blow, move your subject or yourself to an angle that either eliminates them or complements you point of emphasis. When all else fails, you can fix extremes with post-processing.
I've heard folks say that using a hand-held meter is too cumbersome. Takes too much time in fast-moving situations. I call BS. Figuring out whether to use matrix metering or center weighted or 10 or 3 or 1 degree spot or histograms or whatever, then trying to guess what the camera is thinking. That's cumbersome.
I was a photojournalist and shot more than my share of all kinds of action. I always had time to take 5 seconds to get a good incident reading. If you're indoors, walk over and take a reading by your subject. If you're outdoors, stand in light similar to your subject. (No matter how far you are from your subject you're both pretty much the same distance from the sun.)
Anyway, back to my original question. Are there any D70 users out there willing to share their thoughts on this box? Has anyone upgraded to a D200? How did it work out?
Thanks again,
--ken
amitjoey
07-05 12:24 PM
Yes, I agree that AILF is taking care of the lawsuit and it will run its own course. Talking to senators and sending them email and letters will help, but more than that it is the media that we need to focus. Please all help out with the media drive, send emails and letters to media.
2011 de las Banderas de America
gparr
January 21st, 2004, 08:58 AM
Matt, There were patchy clouds so the shutter speeds were all over the place but never slower than 1/300, which is why the lens was wide open. I was scraping for every ounce of light I could get and I knew the extremes of sunlight on one side of the geese and shadows on the other were going to cause me problems, regardless. I did think about swimming out there and hanging a sheet on the left to reflect, but it was zero degrees and I just wasn't up to it. ;)
I was going to reshoot this morning, with smaller apertures and a higher ISO to retain shutter speeds but, as things go in Illinois in the winter, yesterday was probably the only sunny day we'll get this week, so no warm morning sun to shine on the geese. It's a popular hangout spot for geese, so I'll try the shot again. I'm not all that excited about the shot itself, but it's an excercise in perfecting the miniscule talent I have.
Don't worry, I have enough sense to not touch a 1D unless my pockets are bulging with disposable income because I know that, once I do, I won't sleep until I have one!
Don,
Thanks for the thoughts. I tend to go right to manual. I'll incorporate Av and Tv modes into my shooting to see if I like them and/or can get comfortable with them. Usually, once I go to that side of the dial, I figure I might as well do all of the work. Agreed on the fully automatic side. I've used it a few times to see what it would do, but I just can't get comfortable with allowing a computer to dictate how my image will look, outside of composition. And I doubt I'll ever rely on the automated side of the dial.
Gary
I was going to reshoot this morning, with smaller apertures and a higher ISO to retain shutter speeds but, as things go in Illinois in the winter, yesterday was probably the only sunny day we'll get this week, so no warm morning sun to shine on the geese. It's a popular hangout spot for geese, so I'll try the shot again. I'm not all that excited about the shot itself, but it's an excercise in perfecting the miniscule talent I have.
Don't worry, I have enough sense to not touch a 1D unless my pockets are bulging with disposable income because I know that, once I do, I won't sleep until I have one!
Don,
Thanks for the thoughts. I tend to go right to manual. I'll incorporate Av and Tv modes into my shooting to see if I like them and/or can get comfortable with them. Usually, once I go to that side of the dial, I figure I might as well do all of the work. Agreed on the fully automatic side. I've used it a few times to see what it would do, but I just can't get comfortable with allowing a computer to dictate how my image will look, outside of composition. And I doubt I'll ever rely on the automated side of the dial.
Gary