Recent content by Xjacktar

Sara's right of course, but that is an excellent excuse, and it's still an interesting shot. Nice to see a ship for a change.

What a brilliant capture. Perfect focus too!

Not so keen on No.3 Simon, but the others are all frame-worthy imo; good job.

Again, not a fan of No.1, but I love the No.4 for its simplicity, contrast and the lovely stone texture.

Same here Tom, I love No. 3. I like the foreground detail, and something about man-made stuff being dwarfed by nature (the big ominous cloud); so the house is the right size in my opinion.

Fantastic detail, beautiful pics. Please make me feel better and tell me that it took some really expensive kit to get these.

I like this also Mick. I agree that it maybe needs a bit more contrast, but I disagree that it should be cropped. More of the hill, dwarfing the buildings, would be good imho. Of course, I don't know what else would be revealed by expanding the view.

Fantastic sky and reflections. Looks great just as it is to me. I think that rule of thirds thing isn't always appropriate, but that's just my opinion. I'm guessing you already lifted the shadow detail on the ship as far as poss; must have been pretty dark, yes ?

Nice detailed shot Roy; horrible sky you had to contend with. Did you have to lift the brightness because you had the shady side of the ship?

I really like the simplicity of this. Maybe cloning out the wind turbines in the far background would help with that. Did you mean the sky to be that colour? I use to get that when processing in PS Elements, until I learned that you could alter colour temperature selectively.

Thanks for the reassurance guys. I really didn't fancy that drag back to Burgess Hill. I am actually really happy with the camera. Rough and ready lens AF calibrations seem to indicate build quality like D700, rather than D7000.

By the way Matthew, an upload of jpeg to MyShutterCount.com says that the true shutter count matches the current exposure numbering. Does that mean that it was never a demo ?

As far as I know, I recorded the first actuation, but I have not been able to confirm that my EXIF peeping. This forum; I saw a post in another thread which gave the 611xxxx serial number.

I have just bought a 'new' D800E from a major dealer in the south east. The camera appeared pristine, and, thankfully, appears to snap sharply into focus using the left most point (I haven't done anything more methodical so far). Now I see that current serial numbers are > 611xxxx Mine is...

David, thanks for responding. Yes, I had to download a new 64 bit version. Also, I keep an eye on ViewNX2 updates. Strangely, I haven't had any problems with any other file from that session; so I'm not going to worry about it any more.