Nero is a good program but an old version might not be compatible.

There must be some free DVD burning software on the internet somewhere, perhaps someone knows where?

Normally you wouldn't use the same lens for two different formats, so the multiple use on 35mm & digital is a new phenomenon.

Take the 100mm macro as an example. It is 1:1 on 35mm film and it must still be 1:1 on digital. Just imagine focusing the image and then replacing the film with CCD without moving anything else. The image size will not have changed, although the subject will fill more of the reduced digital frame.

What will change is what happens when you enlarge the image and print to say A4. The magnification will change because the degree of enlargement will be different. The subject will be larger on the digital image because it will have been enlarged more.

That's my take on it at this point, but I have been up since 3:45am so I might think some more about it yet...

No you wouldn't, not if you wanted a good print anyway!

Image>Image Size is the place to go to finalise your image size. For print, 300ppi and the appropriate size. For web, 72ppi and probably something between 800 and 1000 pixels wide on the longest side, depending on use. You don't use the same file for both print and web.

My simple method. Shoot JPEG. Copy files to computer - these are the unopened originals, the negatives if you like. Open file to be worked on. Make adjustments needed. Save as TIFF as an A3 sized 300ppi image, ready to print. Anything else, be it a smaller print or a web image, is made from the finalised TIFF and saved in its appropriate form.

This is a huge can of worms to open, but the short answer to the first question is "No." and to the second is "Why?"

We have re-tested extensively since the K10D came out and comparative shots in RAW and JPEG from the camera make very little difference to an A3 print and the advantage can go either way depending on the subject. The idea that we must shoot is RAW to get great quality is just not right.

Why would I need to save anything at any stage as a JPEG? As soon as the JPEG from the camera is opened and worked on every save after that is a TIFF. The exception is use for web, when a small JPEG can be made from the finalised TIFF,

The basic "rule" is never to save the original as a lossy format such as JPEG. I especially don't see the point of shooting in RAW and then introducing data losses further down the line.

Anyway, once an image has been opened and worked on then if you save in a lossless format, usually TIFF or psd, then you will maintain optimum quality.

The only situation for JPEG is for web use, or perhaps for a printing service that specifies JPEGs.

As I normally shoot in JPEG it would be even worse to save a JPEG again as a JPEG as quality would start to fail.

Why can't you set a manual speed of 1/180 sec? That's what I do with studio flash.

There are three versions of the Sigma 28-200mm listed on Photodo and some of them have user reviews and ratings.

Hope that helps.

It all depends what you mean by "loose" and "play" so it's not easy to make a judgement on whether it's normal or not.

If in doubt, why not have a look at another camera to see if it is the same?

I just tried the lens search function to remind myself how it worked. In two clicks I had the selection of Pentax DA lenses there. A third click would have selected the lens I wanted.

One click on Sigma brings up all the Sigma lenses. You don't need to specify the lens mount if you don't want to.

It's not ideal maybe, but at least the info is there if you want it.

Hope that helps!

In what way?

There is a mass of useful information there, was the way it was presented that you didn't like or something else?