1) I believe that your Raynox adaptor will fit to to the end of your lense for lenses
sporting 52-67mm filters. I have never used one, but I believe that they just sort of pop
on and then you screw the lense into the adaptor. I did use macro filters for a very short
time way back when, but was not pleased with the quality of the image. You find that you
will get some vignettiing on most of the images you take using something like this.
2) I use Adobe Creative Suite 4 which has Photoshop in it. You Canon Digital Photo
program will work with the RAW files also. Because of the way that Canon Digital Photo
places the photos in an Album format to view, I use it to scan the pictures and then open
in Photoshop to edit. From Photoshop I save everything that has been edited for printing
as a PSD ( photoshop document).

Do not worry about the issue of Nikon vs. Canon. It is more of an issue of person
preference. I went with Canon because I have used Canon for years and they fit well to my
hand. Look through some of the technical explanations on this site, it will give you an
idea of what some of the meaning of the information that you are receiving and give you a
comparison of camera to camera.

http://www.dpreview.com/

1. If I capture image in RAW, what photoshop should I use? Because my notebook
software cant read Raw.

Adobe Photoshop Lightroom

It doesn't this is off-topic bud, we are allowed to post almost anything we want.

Now quit derailing the topic and read the forum stuff.

um i got a queston............................ what does this have to do with navy feild(')_(')

Tchikaze, thank you for the information. I just got 2x last question.

1. If I capture image in RAW, what photoshop should I use? Because my notebook
software cant read Raw.

2. Can I fix the Raynox Dcr-250 lens for my d3100? As a newbies, I think I start with
macro 1st. Later on I will try to find long range lens.

I asked my friend's advice about DSLR, as usual the older reporter support nikon,
young reporter choice is canon(both of them talk about this topic more than 40mins
zzzzzzzzzzz). One of my couple friend more funny, wife said canon husband said
nikon. Sound like ss player vs bb player.

I think in future I wont sign up for Taekwondo and leaving karate. Hopefully Late
Oyama wont scold me inside my dream. :)

I would like to make one comment with regards to Seiko's night photo question. All
comments were very good and should be taken into account. But the thing not mentioned, and
may be because I am a lot older and now just making the move to digital, but the thing I
have noticed on low light photography with regards to the autofocus lenses is the poor
ability of the system to focus in low light.
I usually manually focus in low light situations with my Canon D60. If, because of how
dark it is, can not see well enough to manually focus, and it is too dark to use the
autofocus, I will use a flash light to hit a reflective spot and let the autofocus lock
onto that. So Seiko, be aware as to whether you autofocus is catching the object.

As for you question about moving up to a " better " body, I would stay with the body you
have until you have learned enough about that camera and digital photography to be able to
make your own decision about what camera to get. If you feel compelled to upgrade
something, focus on lenses that you can grow with.
Also, find a graphics program and become comfortable with it. I personally use photoshop
as my primary and Corel photo-paint as my back up. Taking photos digitally and not being
able to " develope " that photo your self, really really hinders your abilities to produce
those great pictures.

The Canon D60 I have came from someone who was upgrading. I had 30 plus years of field
work with Canon 35mm and was only just thinking about getting into digital. The lenses
that I have for it are ones that I can grow into when it comes time to upgrade. Which
right now, has me looking at the Canon 5D or the 7D.

I have been using the Sigma 17-70/ 2.8-4.5 as my standard lense. This has done a fair job
for close up work. I have noticed something with regards to the new autofocus lenses. I,
as mentioned have been using 35 mm for over 30 years, for the most part Canon, but also
Pentax and Leica. In all that time, I have only had one lens break on me, and that was
from a fall off a glacier ( lost the camera also). That Sigma lens is now going in for its
third repair trip. The manual over ride for the focus ( use manual vast majority of the
time) keeps locking between auto and manual focus so that I can not do either, have to
reset it. I am finding that the equipment is a lot more fragile than what I am use to. I
also have the Canon 70-200 2.8 USM. I have not added any more lenses at this this time as
these have covered most of the work that I do.





I would recommend that you shoot everything in RAW. Capture as much data as you can.
Always cheaper to buy another chip, than to have to make the trip over again because you
compressed the file too much to work with.
And as Emma mentioned, pick up a flash unit, makes for a world of difference when doing
your close up work. I use my Vivatar 283 as my primary off camera flash. Very old, but
very reliable and I can pretty much guess the distance from object just because I have
used it for so long, do not really need to do the math much.

Stratos, I don't want to get into a brand war with you so I'll just say this.

Astrophotography and day-to-day low light photography entails vastly different
parameters and requirements from the camera. Thus to say that because one brand
is popular in a certain field, that means its better in a certain condition, isn't really a
accurate conclusion to jump to.

If you've ever seen low light images from Nikon's best models like the D3x, D3s,
D700 or D7000 in day to day scenarios like concerts, indoor events or night
landscapes, it's hard to say that any other brand can perform better.

But as you said, at the end of the day, it boils down to personal preference and the
feel of a particular camera in your hands.

Emma, canons is the primary option for dslr astrophotography(AP).And thats a fact.
Google it (I am going to buy a 500d for the same reason). :D
The light conditions in AP are extremely low.You need very high iso and several minutes
(thermal behaviour is crucial also).
You drive your camera to the limit.
In "common low light conditions" an average user propably will not see any difference.
And another "problem" is the way nikon handles its raw files.
Thats also a big minus for AP.
But how many people caring about AP? its a very small field.I mentioned AP just for a point.
In the category of D7000 maybe its the best.But generally Canon's are better in THIS
field.Off course compairing cams with similar price tags.
In the dilemma Canons vs Nikons there isnt a clear answer.
Check your budget.Choose the category and buy what suits YOU better.

Sure d7000 is a great camera and noone will regret such a purchase!
Arguing about this,that, wont help seiko and propably now he is confused :)
And d3100 surely is one fine choice, to entry in slr photography.

Stratos, I don't think that's a very accurate.

The D7000's sensor is a better performer in low light than anything Canon has in its
crop sensor line up at the moment.

Anyhow, a third party tester of all camera sensors and their rankings.
The numbers kinda speak for themselves :

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Sensor-rankings/Sheet-view

I just assume Canon as Taekwondo and Nikon as karate, hmmmm may be should
put in this way = lion2 and SY.

It doesnt matter what you using, as long as you know how to push the limit you are
the winner. <====I missed out this point. But after read your post, it reminds me
again. Thank you :)

Other than gundams and camera, there are something we dont wanna to miss in
our life..... play NF>........hehe..