about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: RRRoger  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add RRRoger to your Buddy List
Nikon D800

d800s
Review Date: May 3, 2012 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $3,000.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Awesome Landscape Detail Lots of controls Fast enough for Action Photography Compatible with all my Nikkors Great Pictures even with less than best lens even though better glass gives you better images on any camera. Handles high ISO very well
Cons:

Huge learning curve for me because there are so many settings options.
Not harder to hand hold than a D7000, you need to increase your shutter speed a little more and hold very steady.
I've been using the D800 for a month now for Landscapes, Videos, and Event Photography.


 
Nikon D3

d3
Review Date: Aug 11, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $5,000.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Full Frame Image quality, Extreme reliability, very accurate, strong and fast focus motor; build quality and ergonomics. Very high percentage (over 95%) of my shots are keepers
Cons:
none; D3s is even better

I also have a 5D2
The 5D2 gives me better pictures 5% of the time and is better for Video, Hiking and Landscape work but not action where I throw away 80% of my shots. And, I much prefer the D3 for weddings.

The Nikon D3 is a real work horse for a Professional.
The D3s is a must have for very low light.


 
Canon EOS 5D Mark II

5DII_1_
Review Date: Aug 11, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,300.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Best Canon camera made for the money most ergonomic small and light weight Excellent for hiking and landscape work Excellent for Video
Cons:
Focus slow and inaccurate Usable ISO max is 3200 Too small AF-ON button needs to be enlarged and moved further over.

I appreciate the candor and accuracy of these posts prior to mine.

 
Epson Stylus PRO 4000

StylusPro4000
Review Date: Feb 7, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,800.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Professional Built biggest desktop printer I`ve ever seen. Prints are very detailed and high quality. 220ml ink cartridges seldom need changing. Very reliable.
Cons:
Uses to much desk space Heads need deep cleaning if you do not print every few days or less. Archival inks not as glossy as standard Epson inks. Cannot print less than 8x10 sheet of paper. High gloss full 17" wide paper rolls not yet available

I`ve been using the 4000 since last summer and do not recomend it unless you have a high volume of printing to do. It is an industrial strenght product and very heavy. I can only print on 8 inch or wider sheet paper, although the 4 inch roll paper might work.

The 2200 is much more versitile in that you can print on 4x5 sheet with nearly the same quality. However the small cartridge size drives me crazy.

The smaller drop size of the 4000 causes the heads to clog more easily. If you do not use the printer all the time, it is possible to waste all your ink savings during the cleanings.