Hi All,

I've just upgraded from Photoshop Elements 2 to PE4 (liked the idea of editing 16bit files if required, and the paragraph text facility is particularly useful to me). Overall it seems fine, feature-wise, but it's much slower that 2 was. It seems to think about everything before it does it, even opening menus etc.

Has anyone else experienced this, and if so, have you speeded it up in any way?

I use an AMD XP2500+, with 1Gb DDR400 RAM, two 7200rpm large HDDs with 8Mb buffers, and everything was nice and quick with PE2. I'm guessing that 4 has more stuff running, and going on in the background - can you disable it?

Any help much appreciated.

Thanks,
Dan

Aah, isn't he lovely! I really like Starlings, and think they look their most appealing when the juveniles are getting their adult plumage, around this time of year. The combination of crisp, spotty new feathers, with the paler, smooth ones on the heads - just looks like two different birds stuck together.

I hope he survives, as when he's got his full adult plumage, he'll be practically all white - stand out a bit for Sparrowhawks.

Dan

...and 'best' in what way? I don't think you can beat Velvia, but that's ISO100 (these days!), you may need something faster. But for foliage, colour saturation and fine grain - absolutely stunning slides.

Dan

Hi Mattie,

Don't know specifically about the 18-55mm, I got the 18-35 with my istD, and that was okay, but I've now upgraded to the 16-45 which is lovely - but then it should be 'cos it was £300.

If you've not got a lens that you can use as a wide angle on a digital body (18mm gives the same field of view as 27mm would on 35mm film), and if it's something you'd want (a wideangle lens, I mean), then you've just got to decide whether you want to spend £30 extra getting the kit lens, which would undoubtedly be fine, and just as good as any of the basic Sigma or Tamron lenses of the same focal range, or whether you want to get something like the 16-45, which is obviously a better lens, but whether it's worth that extra expense to you might be debateable.

Regarding your comment "previously blanked out all digital-related information as it was always out of my price range", do you know that you can get an *ist DL2 with lens for around £350 in many shops? I gather this is very similar to the K100D, just without the anti-shake. Just a thought...

Have fun with whatever you get - I haven't looked back since going digital.

Dan

Found an interesting new mag, thought some here might like it...





Not be confused with 'The Hoverfly Review' or 'Bee Beautiful'.


Been a bit quiet on the boards lately - everyone on holiday?

Dan

Thanks Matt,

Hmmm, read the manual, there's a thought. Haven't dug that out in a while...

Anyway, now Matt's kindly confirmed it would work, does anyone know recycling times etc? My main concern is that I did get a.n.other secondhand flash a while back, and the 8sec delay between flashes kind of put me off. The Centon manual flash I currently use recycles in about 3s, so that's what I'm used to.

Thanks,
Dan

I know I should be looking at a 360, but I don't use flash much, and when I do it tends to be macro stuff when I use my cheap manual flash, but, does anyone have experience of the 330FTZ on an istD, and if so, how's it perform?

Do the functions like TTL, second curtain synch, auto zooming etc work? What's the typical recycling time?

They're a lot cheaper than the 360, hence my interest.

Thanks,
Dan

I just tend to use the polariser all the time, or if not, at least have the Cokin holder mounted. I recently dropped my D with 16-45 mounted, fell about 3 feet onto hard floor (thin carpet), lens first . Lens and camera were fine, Cokin holder and adapter were bent. I guess they absorbed most of the impact, a bit like a car's crumple zone. Think it was £8 to replace the two.

Same would apply to a lens hood I reckon, so I tend to stick with these too.

Dan

Well, I've had 8 images written to slide film by Microquiz...

First off, it was quite a surprise (I know it shouldn't have been), to have have a look through the loupe and see these images with grain! Having viewed them on my PC so often, I was used to the smooth digital look, so, yes, the grain looked a bit odd. They use Provia 100, so it's certainly not the grainiest of films.

Secondly, the contrast could have been boosted. Really noticed it when projecting them, right after some Velvia ones. I'll have to e-mail Microquiz to see if they have a profile I can work too, otherwise I'll just have to increase the contrast somewhat. I guess it's a little unfair to expect the same sort of contrast that Velvia gives anyway. I wonder if they'd write to the Velvia I've still got in the fridge if I sent it to them?

Very quick service, ordered Friday night, arrived Tuesday morning.

Will definitely try again, but after sorting out contrast issues.

Dan

Hi IS,

Thanks for the recommendation, I will get round to trying them out this Autumn, I'm certain of that. Seems a shame to have all the images that I've taken in the last 18 months, and no way to project them.

All the best,
Dan