Recent content by Marcell

Bazzer, If you tweak your raw's in dpp, and they dont need any other tinkering, then why do you save as tiff's? Its unneccesary, as long as you keep your raw files bcked up. Tiff's only good if you do various changes in various programs, and needs to save alot before the final product.

O I C. I knew there was a catch:bonk: Jimmy, try faststone viewer to view raw files straight from windows dir, and the simply right click on photo and click on "edit with" ----> either cs3 or lightrrom etc

Both are superb lenses, this comes down to budget imo! f4 cons: slower than 2.8 no IS ( as you didnt mention it will be the is version) makes this in theory even more slower pro's: cheaper than 2.8 lighter than 2.8 just as sharp as 2.8 and vice versa for the 2.8

But without fast glass, its useless trying to shoot at higher iso when the light arent sufficient.:bang: pity the fastglass are so damn expensive:thumbsdown:

I might be wrong, but if you use .dng files the changes get saved within the file as opposed to RAW with its separate file for the changes made, so it might be possible to change WB/saturation etc in lightroom, and if opened in cs3 the changes would be noted.

Lucky you, the prices in SA are soaring since beginning of 2008. The 40d 17-85 is kit costs R 19000 here in south africa, more or less 1300pounds :bang::thumbsdown:

I shoot in Raw only. Only exception being if client needs files directly after shoot, or if printing is done on site, then ill shoot jpg and use picture styles to manipulate the sat/col/contrast etc. But I hate shooting jpg:bonk: Conserning the pp work, i dump on harddrive, backup to external...