I almost always shoot RAW+ and have always done so since purchasing my first DSLR. If the jpeg is acceptable, or can easily be made so, I'll use it, but for what I consider my best captures (no snide comments, please:mrgreen I'll always work from a copy of the RAW and save the original: with the cost of TB+ HD drives these days I see no point in doing otherwise. For editing I mostly use PSE, resorting to the Imagenomic plug-in if noise is a problem, but have recently bought Adobe Lightroom, which I'm currently learning (ever so slowly) to use.

Jon

Algi's and Glyns comments cover the main points but it is important to remember the raw visual data from the eye is subject to a massive amount of processing in the visual cortex before being routed to the part of the brain that then makes sense of what we are looking at in the viewfinder and defines what we perceive as the critical point of focus in the field of view. By contrast, the AF sensor and associated algorithms that are used 'in camera' to define 'correct focus' are primitive in the extreme; even in the best currently available cameras. Most of the time, as we all know, this is rarely a cause for concern, but it becomes significant when when approaching 1:1 and greater because the depth of field is frequently less than or equal to a couple of mm; especially when one considers that all current AF systems (tin hat on in anticipation of a barrage of 'corrections') are stepping and not step-less, as I assume remains the case when focusing manually.

Many posts on this forum, and on others, cover the issue of focus calibration and the fact that, even on lenses not intended for macro photography, adjustment is often required to ensure accurate focus (manual and AF) and this may be another factor that you need to consider.

Penultimately, I, and others, have found that eye cup magnifiers, even when the magnification ratio is quite modest: e.g. the Pentax O-ME53, can make accurate manual focusing much less 'hit and miss'. Yet others combine one of these with a compatible, third-part focusing screen (e.g. from the KatzEye range) but, despite my deteriorating eyesight, I have not found this necessary.

Finally (honest!) have you eliminated the possibility that what you perceive as 'out of focus' is in fact blur caused by excessive camera shake/'mirror-slap'?

Hope at least some of this adds to the excellent advice given in the earlier and more succinct posts of others

Jon

JohnX said:

If funds are the limiting factor, I would agree with the above suggestion. Better yet, I have a brand new 234RC which is still in the original packaging which you can have for £12.50 plus p&p (whichever service you wish to pay for)

Drop me a line if your interested.

Jon

1) Yes

2) Yes

This would be good if you want a Giotto to match link

or this if your not fussed link

I use the latter with a K20D and Sigma 100-300mm f4 EX DG and have had no problems.

Yes I know they probably cost more than the monopod but either will give many years good service, can be retained if you ever decide to go for a bigger and/or lighter monopod and can be used with a tripod if the need arises.

Best wishes,

Jon

Graham,

If the new monitor is for photo editing I don't understand why you are focussing (no pun intended) on the lower end of the market

The predominant screen type used at this level (TN or Twisted Nematic)are characterised by a limited colour gamut and dynamic range and poor viewing angles Ideally, IMHO, you should be looking at those monitors in the mid-range that use IPS (In Plane Switching) or PVA (Patterned Vertical Alignment) screens. These are now available from several manufacturers including Dell, EIZO, HP, NEC and, more recently, Samsung. Of these, those from Dell and HP seem to suffer the most from QC issues; at least that is the impression one gains from the forums and/or user reviews. I took the plunge a couple of years ago and purchased an Eizo from the lower end of their range and have never regretted paying the premium over similar sized screens from other manufacturers.

Whatever screen type you end up buying, to get the best from it you will need to pay attention to the room lighting (quality and amount - I now use only daylight balanced (6500K) lamps in my work area) and, ideally, use it in conjunction with a colour calibration device (I use a Pantone Huey Pro.

You will end up spending more but it will be worth it in the end: honest

Hope this is of some help.

Regards,

Jon

P.S. When I started to write this there had been no posts in reply

ChrisA wrote

This family-run business also trades under the name of 'Just' and is located less than 10 miles from where I live. They also sell pre-wetted swabs which, depending on the size of sensor to be cleaned, can cost up to £37.00 for 12. Whilst this may seem expensive, it is, IMHO, important to consider the whole 'package' and not simply the 'check-out' price.

The pre- and post-sale support this business offers is, in my experience, outstanding and refreshingly honest: by which I mean they will discuss your concerns and needs with you and not try to seduce you into buying products you don't need. For example, the fist time I spoke to them on the phone I was invited to drop in, which I did. I was given a warm welcome, provided with tea and given the undivided attention of the owner for at least 30 minutes. During this time he explained the whole cleaning process to me, demonstrated the same using a sensor that had been removed from a camera and reassured me that as the sensor is protected by a filter, there is very little risk of causing harm. He concluded by reiterating whet he had told me when I first e-mailed him with test images taken to show dust particles on my camera sensor: you don't need to clean it yet as under normal shooting conditions any dust present will not be be visible on the captured image and to avoid becoming an overly neurotic 'pixel peeper'. He then spent another 30-minutes showing me examples from his portfolio and the various ways an amateur can earn cash to subsidise their LBATotal cost to me £0.00.

A couple of days later I returned and said I had been much encouraged but would still like to see a demonstration of the cleaning cleaning process on an actual camera body (mine). This he then proceeded to do and 15 minutes later, including the taking of before and after 'test' shots, I had a spotless sensor. Total cost was, I believe, £20.00.

Subsequently I purchased from them a Dust-Aid Platinum (dry) Sensor Cleaning Kit and Eclipse (wet) Sensor Swabs, which I have used successfully, alone or in combination, to clean my GX10 and K20D sensors when absolutely necessary.

Small businesses offering exceptional service like this need and deserve our support: otherwise all that will remain will be the 'stack-em-high and sell them cheap (not) box shifters' who are not interested in serious, or refuse to allow, 'try before you buy', do not stock the wide range of accessories and ancillary equipment that we require (cf the related thread on local independent dealers on this thread) and are incapable, in the main, of giving informed advice and/or after-sales support; as is often the case when buying on ebay.

Jon

Puma wrote:

Have used both platforms (PC from Windows 3.1 and Mac from OS6.0) over many years. Originally a staunch devotee of Macs and the Apple OS but with the passage of time my antipathy to all things Windows has dissapated. It remains the case, IMHO, that Apple produce some of the most visually appealing 'one-box'solutions but this comes at the expense of cost, flexibility and, to an extent, easy upgradeability, although things have improved considerably since the switch from Power PC to Intel.

These days, I use exclusively Windows (dual boot XP 32-bit and 7 64-bit) because I like to custom build my own PCs. Reliability (hardware and software) is not an issue, in my experience, if you subject your PC (Mac too, I imagine) to routine maintenance, just as you would (should) a car and are very careful about what you download and install on it!

Keeping a beady eye on the Linux alternatives, however, as I fancy running a completely 'open-source' machine. All that is stopping me at present is the need to run certain educational software for which no Linux version exists.

For photo-editing I use PSE (8.0) and have just purchased Lightroom 3.2 and both run smoothly and reliably on my current PC. Of the the free/less expensive alternatives I have tried Photofiltre Studio and Paint.net, both of which are excellent programmes but not quite as 'user-friendly' as PSE. I have also dabbled with the GIMP, which is an amazing programme, even in its Windows guise, and one that I might have settled for if it wasn't for the fact that as a teacher I was able to buy a copy of Lightroom for £70.00.

Jon

Don,

Sigma EM-140 DG PTTL Ring Flash arrived safely and on (tearing) open the package proved to be in the promised 'as new' condition. Just waiting for a 62mm ringflash adapter from the good people at SRS to arrive so that I can couple it with my 70mm Macro and explore the many lighting options it offers.

My only regret is that I didn't take the opportunity to snap-up the 17-70mm f2.8 and 105mm macro before they were offered for sale on ebay.

Best wishes and good luck with you new kit

Jon

PM sent re Sigma Ring Flash

Jon

Russell,

Are you sure that the problem is not with the SCSI card/driver, but with the Scanwit driver: Before going any further you need to do a search for an XP-compatible Scanwit driver, install it and then try to run your scanner again. If the problem is not solved, then continue as described below.

Don't buy a new SCSI card! Instead, look for a second-hand adaptec on fleabay making sure that it has the correct socket for the conector on your SCSI cable (target price £10.00 or less). Drivers for the basic adaptec SCSI cards will be already present in XP. Mid-range cards might require specific drivers which will be available on the adapetec website. If not, download and install a WIndows 2K driver (ignore any protestations that XP might make)having first set a system-restore point. Drivers for Windows 2K will often work in XP without issues. If it doesn't or you have stability problems, use either the device manager to uninstall the driver or just restore your system state using the restore point made earlier. At this point you will need to search on the www for a 'hacked' driver.

If that doesn't work, rather than buy a SCSI-USB adapter, I'd forget the Scanwit and try to find a second-hand USB scanner (Minolta, Canon OR Nikon) on fleabay.

It all sounds more difficult than it really is: trust me

Jon