On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 04:29:56 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 07:30:31 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 03:02:13 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

You have to learn to take pictures which are 99% correct when you click the
shutter, and forget that there's software, the modern equivalent of the
darkroom. Shut of ALL focus and exposure automation, and never mind the bad
eyes excuse. Alfred Eisenstadt took nice sharp pictures with a manual focus
camera until he was much older than you.

I disagree with that approach.

In my opinon, you start with the automagic components and see what the
camera is using as a base line for most of the images you take.

Once you get a feel for how the camera looks at the world, then you
start experimenting with the manual functions bracketing the auto
features base settings.

You have to have a feel for it first.

Admittedly, John is using a hammer to drive a stick pin approach when
he'd probably be better off with a really nice point-and-shoot, but he
has it, so coaching him through the proess is the better way to go.

I agree. I've done my 35mm time. I've done my darkrooom time. And now I
want to play with my toy. I'm the first to admit, however, that I have a
lot to learn about my new toy. It is much different from the Canon FTQL
with which I grew up.

So, patience is the key. Today I am going to experiment with NEF (RAW) +
JPEG Fine, and see if I can tell a difference. Supposedly, this camera will
store the picture in *both* formats at the same time. That should be
interesting.

There is not a lot of difference between the old film days and
digital.

What happens in a lot of cases, is that people don't realize that the
camera does a lot of post processing unless you shoot in RAW which is
basically the uncompressed, unedited raw data.

Terminology difference? Yes. Practical difference? No.

It's just learning a new language.