Photography Advice
- Thread starter Mercutio
- Start date
Santilli said:
Greg,
Who said that Pentax was a second level company? They were one of the big five in 35 mm for years and years and have some nice MF gear too.
time,
If familiar with Rockwell you'll probably notice the same inconsistent reviews as usual though that one is better than many. Some points are discussed in detail and others ignored. Unfortunately his experience with a range of equipment is limited. He knows the gear he owns, but can be clueless about other brands and models. In a way his reviews are sort of like a THG review. There is useful info, but some parts make one cringe. When challenged he can become very defensive and hide behind the 7 levels of photographers theory (quite amusing and accurate, too). I do not want to sound so bashing, since there is a lot of very useful information on the site and I do find the lens reviews valuable.
Mercutio said:
Mercutio,
Realize that a 75-300 lens on the 1/1.6 frame sensor of the 300D/10D is equal to 120-480mm on 35mm. It would be good for some situations, but a shorter lens would be needed in others. Canon makes a 55-200 (?) non-IS lens as a companion to the cheapie 18-55 DRebel kit lens. There is no intermediate IS lens yet for the small sensors. Anyway I sent an e-mail in case you want to discuss anything further, whether Nikon or Canon, etc.
time
Storage? I am Storage!
Lunar,
I agree with some of your comments about Ken Rockwell, but there are two points I'd like to make:
1. He is apparently a highly successful professional photographer. His impressions, subjective or objective, are like gold.
This most certainly is not the case with the major camera review sites. In fact, I'd suggest that they are the ones who tend to be more like THG.
Would you mind throwing us some examples of how he makes you cringe? I found the bits that annoyed me were comparitively trivial in the overall scheme of things.
2. I actually approve of the fact that "Some points are discussed in detail and others ignored." My #1 pet beef is DPReview's obsession with ultimate resolution. For starters, I come up with different results when I look at their samples.
More importantly, their tests are based on horizontal and vertical black and white (100% contrast) lines. You don't see many of those in a typical photograph ...
These tests are completely beholden to the vagaries of the processing algorithms in the camera. Canon, for example, tends to excel when considering horizontal and vertical lines, yet sucks in diagonal lines - when we're talking about test patterns.
I'd liken the comparison to reading PC Magazine or taking advice from Mercutio. The latter may sometimes succumb to private prejudices, but his advice based on experience is priceless.
PC Magazine can tell you which equipment performed 1% faster than the competition. :roll:
I agree with some of your comments about Ken Rockwell, but there are two points I'd like to make:
1. He is apparently a highly successful professional photographer. His impressions, subjective or objective, are like gold.
This most certainly is not the case with the major camera review sites. In fact, I'd suggest that they are the ones who tend to be more like THG.
Would you mind throwing us some examples of how he makes you cringe? I found the bits that annoyed me were comparitively trivial in the overall scheme of things.
2. I actually approve of the fact that "Some points are discussed in detail and others ignored." My #1 pet beef is DPReview's obsession with ultimate resolution. For starters, I come up with different results when I look at their samples.
More importantly, their tests are based on horizontal and vertical black and white (100% contrast) lines. You don't see many of those in a typical photograph ...
These tests are completely beholden to the vagaries of the processing algorithms in the camera. Canon, for example, tends to excel when considering horizontal and vertical lines, yet sucks in diagonal lines - when we're talking about test patterns.
I'd liken the comparison to reading PC Magazine or taking advice from Mercutio. The latter may sometimes succumb to private prejudices, but his advice based on experience is priceless.
PC Magazine can tell you which equipment performed 1% faster than the competition. :roll:
Anyway, here's a novel idea: Mercutio, go to a Worst Buy (or whatever) and look at all the cameras they have in stock. Find out which ones seem to work best in your hands. After that, worry about the specifications, tests, to weed out the possibly-second-rate cameras.
If you ONLY look at specifications and test results to buy a camera, then you definitely run the risk of getting something that might not meet your expectations.
Also, more megapixels does not mean a better camera! There are some really good 4 and 5 megapixel cameras. You can also sometimes get yesterday's top performing cameras for a considerable markdown.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
E-mail isn't an effective tool for me at the moment. Here at my day job I don't have a PC set up to check my 15 or so accounts (it took me several minutes to track down Lunar's message), and at home I'm using MSN9 dialup on my laptop, which for some reason won't play nice with XP's ICS, so my mail server is starving, too.
As far as things go, I and a lot of other professionals I know of tend to wear prejudices on our sleeves. Bias is very easy to see in that case. And usually it's well founded, one way or the other, despite differences of opinion (GaryH doesn't like ATI 'cause of driver issues. I like ATI 'cause its cards don't overheat or fail with astonishing regularity).
I guess I don't think about it often enough, but time is dead-on about the value of a pro's opinion.
WRT lens choice, given that I'd almost certainly work without a tripod most of the time (I don't want to carry one around, anyway), isn't Image Stabilization something of an imperative? I know photographers have gotten away without it for decades, but looking at comparison shots, it looked very worthwhile to me. I didn't see a whole lot of "affordable" IS lenses out there.
As far as playing with the stock at the local electronics megaplexes, man, I already did that. Unfortunately, both the local places (Best Buy and Circuit City) were out of stock on the DSLRs. As I said before, the Point and Shoot guys mostly weren't all that pleasing. Also, being left handed, the arrangement of every camera I've used is going to be a little awkward for me (my cross to bear).
As far as things go, I and a lot of other professionals I know of tend to wear prejudices on our sleeves. Bias is very easy to see in that case. And usually it's well founded, one way or the other, despite differences of opinion (GaryH doesn't like ATI 'cause of driver issues. I like ATI 'cause its cards don't overheat or fail with astonishing regularity).
I guess I don't think about it often enough, but time is dead-on about the value of a pro's opinion.
WRT lens choice, given that I'd almost certainly work without a tripod most of the time (I don't want to carry one around, anyway), isn't Image Stabilization something of an imperative? I know photographers have gotten away without it for decades, but looking at comparison shots, it looked very worthwhile to me. I didn't see a whole lot of "affordable" IS lenses out there.
As far as playing with the stock at the local electronics megaplexes, man, I already did that. Unfortunately, both the local places (Best Buy and Circuit City) were out of stock on the DSLRs. As I said before, the Point and Shoot guys mostly weren't all that pleasing. Also, being left handed, the arrangement of every camera I've used is going to be a little awkward for me (my cross to bear).
IS is worth about 1 1/2 - 2 fstops and that can make all the difference when hand holding a big lens. The general rule for hand holding is a shuter speed no slower than the focal length of your lens. So for a 400mm lens you need at least 1/400 of a second shutter speed. With IS you can deal a shutter speed of around 1/150 of a second with the same lens.
Another way to compensate would to increase the ISO of your film (or the digital equivilant) making everything faster. IS is equivilent of going from 100ASA to 350-400ASA film. The problem increasing the ISO that the pictures become grainy (film) and in the digital world (noise). A better CCD (camera) or better film can signifigently improve the result.
The next way to compsensate would be to get a fast lens (really expensive, heavy, and bulky)
A third way is to supply light using a flash. The problem here is that you need a very bright light source (or at least very focused) if the subject is far away. It also produces red-eye and can do some strange stuff with shadows (or the lack therof). You can also end up with a black or fuzzy/soft background with the foreground perfect.
A fourth soultion is to have a bright sunny day: be lucky The sun is a very bright light source and that means your shutter speeds will go up drasticly on a good day. The problem with the sun is with shadows producing excessive contrast.
The point i'm trying to make is that IS is not the only solution and it is not a cure-all for all the problems of hand holding a big lens. Everything has its trade-offs. The art of photography is the art of choosing those trade-offs to get the image that you had in mind.
Another way to compensate would to increase the ISO of your film (or the digital equivilant) making everything faster. IS is equivilent of going from 100ASA to 350-400ASA film. The problem increasing the ISO that the pictures become grainy (film) and in the digital world (noise). A better CCD (camera) or better film can signifigently improve the result.
The next way to compsensate would be to get a fast lens (really expensive, heavy, and bulky)
A third way is to supply light using a flash. The problem here is that you need a very bright light source (or at least very focused) if the subject is far away. It also produces red-eye and can do some strange stuff with shadows (or the lack therof). You can also end up with a black or fuzzy/soft background with the foreground perfect.
A fourth soultion is to have a bright sunny day: be lucky The sun is a very bright light source and that means your shutter speeds will go up drasticly on a good day. The problem with the sun is with shadows producing excessive contrast.
The point i'm trying to make is that IS is not the only solution and it is not a cure-all for all the problems of hand holding a big lens. Everything has its trade-offs. The art of photography is the art of choosing those trade-offs to get the image that you had in mind.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I don't know why I haven't said this to date, but thank you to everyone who has participated in this thread. I think I will do well with the advice I've been given.
re: art of photography. All those who are more knowledgable than me on this topic had to learn somewhere and some time. Putting aside technical details (perish the thought! In the computers forum, no less!), how did you guys learn to shoot?
I've seen incredible, striking photos from Tannin (birds and hard disks), and Buck's pictures of flowers his garden. LM and GH obviously take their pictures seriously as well. I know I'd have a long way to go to get to that level - that, or Buck and Tannin take fantastic pictures on accident
re: art of photography. All those who are more knowledgable than me on this topic had to learn somewhere and some time. Putting aside technical details (perish the thought! In the computers forum, no less!), how did you guys learn to shoot?
I've seen incredible, striking photos from Tannin (birds and hard disks), and Buck's pictures of flowers his garden. LM and GH obviously take their pictures seriously as well. I know I'd have a long way to go to get to that level - that, or Buck and Tannin take fantastic pictures on accident
Tea
Storage? I am Storage!
Of course he doez it by accident . (Tannin I mean.) I do the tricky ztuff.
But although I've not contributed a great deal to this thread - I'd rather listen to the experts like .NUT and LM - I am fowollowing it with keen interest.
And surely Pentax is a second-tier maker.
There is Canon and Nikon, and then there is everybody else.
Then there are three or four other serious players - Pentax, Minolta, perhaps Olympus - and then there is the rest.
And so on.
Or that's how I understand it, anyway. It's no disparagement to Pentax to call them "second tier". Second tier is good. Samsung are a second-tier hard drive maker : I won't buy any other brand. Well, so are Western Digital, but there you go. It all depends.
But although I've not contributed a great deal to this thread - I'd rather listen to the experts like .NUT and LM - I am fowollowing it with keen interest.
And surely Pentax is a second-tier maker.
There is Canon and Nikon, and then there is everybody else.
Then there are three or four other serious players - Pentax, Minolta, perhaps Olympus - and then there is the rest.
And so on.
Or that's how I understand it, anyway. It's no disparagement to Pentax to call them "second tier". Second tier is good. Samsung are a second-tier hard drive maker : I won't buy any other brand. Well, so are Western Digital, but there you go. It all depends.
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
Mercutio said:I've seen incredible, striking photos from Tannin (birds and hard disks), and Buck's pictures of flowers his garden. LM and GH obviously take their pictures seriously as well. I know I'd have a long way to go to get to that level - that, or Buck and Tannin take fantastic pictures on accident
Thanks for the compliment Merc, I never knew my pictures were that good. The pictures that I have displayed are not accidental, or incidental for that matter. There are, in fact, many other pictures that I wouldn’t bother showing my closest friends – they’re just ugly. I have the good fortune of photographing wildlife that doesn’t move (unless there is a slight breeze – this really messes up my ¼ second and longer exposures), so I could easily take 5 pictures of the same plant with different shutter speeds, and different aperture sizes. Out of these 5 pictures, one may qualify for my list of uploaded pictures, the rest end up on the cutting room floor. Remember, I’m not in the digital photography age; I’m still using a Minolta X-G1 with the tried and true 35-mm film, all sitting on top of a basic tri-pod. Thus, I don’t know how the picture will look until I get the entire film developed, hence, my need for several shots of the same object. Also, keep in mind that I approach photography just like I approach the creation of an Excel spreadsheet or my website – it needs to look good. The content is almost second place for me, and is never more of a priority then the look and feel of something. Yes, I do get the design of things wrong from time to time, but I usually come around and straighten things up.
Bartender
Storage is cool
Face it Buck, you're normally too drunk to take a decent picture, that iz why it takes multiple shots and several rollz of film for one louzy flower.
bahngeist
What is this storage?
Mercutio said:
Photography is both an art and a craft, the more you shoot and experiment the better your shots will become – at least, one would hope
Try different angles and move around your subject; different lens apertures and shutter speed combinations when shooting the same subject; different times of the day and weather conditions when shooting outdoors, and different types of light sources when shooting inside. When starting out don’t be timid: since it seems you plan on getting a digital camera you don’t have to worry overmuch about burning through film, so use that to your advantage and experiment whenever you can. And perhaps the most important thing: have fun and take chances.Although your primary interest appears to be taking shots of women on display, don’t just limit yourself to that subject. Conversely, you may want to consider taking a studio-based course in figure photography once you become more adept as a photographer. Something else you may also want to consider is take some studio courses in visual design and drawing – you would be surprised how many photography programs regard the latter as a core course, the principle reasons, amongst others, being that drawing teaches discipline and also trains you ‘to see rather than just look’. The four years art college training I had provided a definite competitive edge over my compatriots when I went on to complete a bachelor of photographic arts, the principle reason being that by that time I had a ‘trained eye’.
One of the reasons why I suggested fixed focal length lenses over a zoom is that the former encourages a certain amount of discipline to use properly. By this I mean a zoom is just too easy to use in relation to changing focal lengths, and chances are you wouldn’t learn as much than if you stuck with one or two fixed lenses when starting out. The thing to remember here is that a professional is generally more able to take consistently better shots with an ‘Instamatic’ than an amateur would with a top-of-the-line Canon or Nikon. The principle difference is experience and knowledge of, and being able to control, one’s tools; the primary value of top quality tools is that they generally offer greater flexibility and far sharper final images: in short, expensive tools won’t guarantee that you will be or become a better photographer.
Of course all this revolves around on just how serious you are in learning photography; if your intent is just to dabble and to remain that way then by all means go with a zoom and have a blast. Regardless, if you don’t enjoy yourself in playing with the medium you will likely find that your pictures will lack that certain 'spark' that separates the mediocre from the memorable.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
Argh.
I'd like to take some pictures I can be proud of. Maybe something I might hang on a wall. Taking pictures at that one event is something I think well be highly enjoyable, but it's only peripheral to really taking great pictures.
Classroom time isn't something that would be easy for me to come by, unfortunately. Were there any texts or articles that you specifically remember from your education?
I'd like to take some pictures I can be proud of. Maybe something I might hang on a wall. Taking pictures at that one event is something I think well be highly enjoyable, but it's only peripheral to really taking great pictures.
Classroom time isn't something that would be easy for me to come by, unfortunately. Were there any texts or articles that you specifically remember from your education?
bahngeist
What is this storage?
Mercutio said:
I completed my photo studies back in '87, and unfortunately don't remember the titles of the texts -- sorry. Anyway, practically all of them were studio and darkroom technical manuals that would be of no practical value to you. Kodak generally produces good, unbiased guidebooks; as does Focal Press (a British publisher). Beware of guidebooks by self-proclaimed experts.
You live somewhat in the Chicago area, correct? If so, check out the library at the Art Institute of Chicago or any other college/university that has a strong visual arts program: chances are they selected books that would be relatively unbiased, of otherwise good quality information-wise, and well-suited to guiding you along.
bahngeist
What is this storage?
Mercutio,
Forgot to mention: if you plan on going out and creating shots good enough to hang on your wall chances are you won't. You may get the odd lucky shot or two that may fit that bill depending how much shooting you do. That is why is I recommend that you experiment continually, start out with a minimal amount of equipment, and get to know how to use it to the point that you can work with it automatically. All this comes with practice, so be patient but push the edge also. When you hit the point that you find pictures that you felt were once good to be lacking, and perhaps mildly embarassing in their technique, you are getting somewhere -- it means that you have learned and are growing.
Forgot to mention: if you plan on going out and creating shots good enough to hang on your wall chances are you won't. You may get the odd lucky shot or two that may fit that bill depending how much shooting you do. That is why is I recommend that you experiment continually, start out with a minimal amount of equipment, and get to know how to use it to the point that you can work with it automatically. All this comes with practice, so be patient but push the edge also. When you hit the point that you find pictures that you felt were once good to be lacking, and perhaps mildly embarassing in their technique, you are getting somewhere -- it means that you have learned and are growing.
Howell
Storage? I am Storage!
Yeah, I only keep about 50% of my shots. I would want others to see only about 10%.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I managed to find a retail store that had a 10D in stock, but no Canon lenses. I used it with a Sigma 105/f2.8 lens It was a little hefty by itself, but lighter than every camcorder I've ever handled.
I was trying to be deliberate in taking shots, but it seemed to be on a hair trigger. It seemed like the autofocus wasn't doing anything until the very instant I took my shot (of the far wall of the shop; there wasn't much else I could work with).
I'm sure that's a characteristic of the camera I'd have to get used to. It's very different from other cameras I've used, though.
Now, I need to find a D70...
I was trying to be deliberate in taking shots, but it seemed to be on a hair trigger. It seemed like the autofocus wasn't doing anything until the very instant I took my shot (of the far wall of the shop; there wasn't much else I could work with).
I'm sure that's a characteristic of the camera I'd have to get used to. It's very different from other cameras I've used, though.
Now, I need to find a D70...
I learned the old fashioned way, by trial and error. I took my first photo with Brownie Hawkeye (flash), progressed to Polaroid SLR and then 35mm Nikons by the mid 70s. It was not a quick process. I read some books eons ago, but they are long gone. In some ways I wish I had attended some classes or workshops early on.Mercutio said:
Tea,
Perhaps I don't know the differences in definition of top tier, second level etc. I own some Nikon, Canon and Contax G 35mm (RF) gear. I have medium format stuff too, but that is another story. The Contax G lenses are the best I've used since aborted attempt to go with Leica M some years ago. I still hope beyond hope that there will be a digital G some day.
time,
I take it back. I looked at the DpReview site and I can only say wow, are those guys ever so anal. All those exciting and deeply meaningful frames of resolution charts... :roll:
Howell,
What do you shoot that results in 50% usable images? I can’t think of much besides class portraits or some other set-up situation with fixed lighting and low profits or little time. I was getting about 2-3% keepers on 35mm film and 5-10% on 120/220. I shoot more with a digital body, so the number has dropped to ~1.5-2%. The ones I would show to anyone are <<1%, due to my personal feelings though, not technical issues.
Tea
Storage? I am Storage!
I think "tierness" is a matter of personal defenition, Misty One. Sort of like madness: anyone straighter than me is uptight and anal, anyone more bent than me is slightly insane.
Howell
Storage? I am Storage!
LunarMist said:
Nearly everthing I shoot has some sentimental quality. Places, people, events in my travels. I shoot more as a photo-journalist than a photographer. Occasionally the picture is good enough technically and of an interesting enough subject that I think someone might find it appealing outside of the sentementality.
For example, I would not necessarily show most people pictures of a rodeo I went to, but bacause I know how to work the camera, there might be one interesting and good enough that I would show.
This is one of about 5-10 shots I took in this location a couple years ago. I've posted it before. Its kinda big.
Pradeep
Storage? I am Storage!
Well I've ordered a D70 kit from BustBuy.com. I'll let you know how it goes.
Howell
Storage? I am Storage!
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
What kind of equipment did you use to take that shot?
The JoJo
Wannabe Storage Freak
Awesome picture Howell!
Howell
Storage? I am Storage!
Mercutio said:
My old Canon A20. 2.1MP. Handheld. The panoramic would have been a little better with a tripod. It's an odd shape after rotating and cropping. Before I fixed it each picture of the panorama was rotated about 2 degrees CW. Must have had one foot on a rock.
Onomatopoeic
Learning Storage Performance
Santilli said:
I somewhat recently used both a new Nikon D70 and a D100 together for quick comparison purposes. I had used the D100 a couple of times in the past (it's been out for a while) along with a D1X.
The new D70 and D100 are practically equivalent cameras when using them, but the first thing I noticed picking them up -- which prejudiced me towards the D100 -- is that the D100 has a metal body and the D70 has a hard plastic body.
Bender
What is this storage?
Onomatopoeic said:
Thats what my friend told me too. When he tried the D100, he said that the D100 feels "light" compared to his all-metal F3. Then he tried the D70 and said it feels too "plastic" He still like the solidness and heaviness of the F3s and F4s and say it will take him a long time to adjust to the light weight of the digital cameras.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
Where are you guys finding those Nikons? Pradeep, my local Best Buy expressly told me they would NOT be stocking the D70 'til fall.
Fushigi
Storage Is My Life
Merc, have you tried Ritz Camera/Wolf Camera? I'm pretty sure they've got a presence in your area.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
Not in NWI. I know where there are some in the suburbs.
Pradeep
Storage? I am Storage!
Mercutio said:
You have to order it on-line, if there aren't any stores nearby with stock. Free ground shipping. I paid the $8 something for 2nd day, it's currently in Ohio and I should have it tomorrow.
Fushigi
Storage Is My Life
Fushigi
Storage Is My Life
BTW, you may want to ensure your camera uses CF/CFII media. Then you can buy this 4GB microdrive-based MP3 player for $200 and rip it apart for the storage. Much cheaper than buying the 4GB drive alone. And you can put some other CF media in it and still use it as an MP3 player. 8)
Pradeep
Storage? I am Storage!
Lot of capacity for the price, but looking at the D70 review at least, the Microdrive lags in performance compared to say an Ultra II Sandisk CF card, with nearly twice the write times.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/page10.asp
However that is a 1GB Microdrive, perhaps it does better with the faster 4GB version.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/page10.asp
However that is a 1GB Microdrive, perhaps it does better with the faster 4GB version.
Pradeep
Storage? I am Storage!
Got the D70. First impression is that the body is pretty light, my mother has a Nikon F-401 or 501 film body, it's much heavier. Personally I can handle the plastic body, if it gives me a lighter weight. Combined with the kit lens it's only a little heavier than my Coolpix 995, it's easy to hold in one hand. Right now I'm charging the batt, trembling with anticipation. I'll be using it with a 1GB Microdrive and a 256MB SimpleTech CF card.
Pradeep
Storage? I am Storage!
After two days playing here are my conclusions:
Extremely fast response compare to CP 995. From Off to On to shooting is instant. In single shot mode it takes em as fast as I can squeeze the trigger. Battery life is excellent, still on the original charge. So much nicer image quality looking thru the viewfinder than looking at an LCD screen - tho you notice camera shake a lot more!
Focusing is near silent, and much faster than 995. Only downer is that switching from continous to single AF and vice versa requires delving in the menus, there's no dedicated switch for it.
Picture quality is outstanding. I've found the best results are when i shoot in RAW, open it in Nikon Capture, then send it to Photshop as a 16bit TIFF. Print from there on the Epson R800, a big step up from the 995, even on 5*7 borderless (I've run out of 8*10s right now).
Nikon Capture is an outrageous ram hog, used up about 700MB - I have 512MB. Need more ram... and it's not the most stable or fast program either, tho that may be due to virtual memory issues. I'll have to get the SCSI drives up and running to see how they handle it.
In short, highly recommended. I've got a 70-300mm lens coming from ebay for the zoom end of things (slow but should be OK in good light). The VR lens are the ones to drool after, and they command a steep price. I'll keep the 995 for hunting trips etc.
Extremely fast response compare to CP 995. From Off to On to shooting is instant. In single shot mode it takes em as fast as I can squeeze the trigger. Battery life is excellent, still on the original charge. So much nicer image quality looking thru the viewfinder than looking at an LCD screen - tho you notice camera shake a lot more!
Focusing is near silent, and much faster than 995. Only downer is that switching from continous to single AF and vice versa requires delving in the menus, there's no dedicated switch for it.
Picture quality is outstanding. I've found the best results are when i shoot in RAW, open it in Nikon Capture, then send it to Photshop as a 16bit TIFF. Print from there on the Epson R800, a big step up from the 995, even on 5*7 borderless (I've run out of 8*10s right now).
Nikon Capture is an outrageous ram hog, used up about 700MB - I have 512MB. Need more ram... and it's not the most stable or fast program either, tho that may be due to virtual memory issues. I'll have to get the SCSI drives up and running to see how they handle it.
In short, highly recommended. I've got a 70-300mm lens coming from ebay for the zoom end of things (slow but should be OK in good light). The VR lens are the ones to drool after, and they command a steep price. I'll keep the 995 for hunting trips etc.
Since the D70 has only a four frame buffer and has very fast processing capabilites (~5MB/s), it is often beneficial to use a fast CF card. The fastest cards are now about 60x (Ultra II/Extreme), with 80x Lexars etc. coming soon. According to RG the 40x and 45x cards in the D70 are somewhat slower than 60x cards and anything slower would be noticeably worse. Check the CF Database for regular updates.
ddrueding
Fixture
Wow, I had no idea that CF was so slow...I don't mean to derail, but could anyone tell me why?