Big Beautiful Doll in better days. Hope she will be like that very soon again!

Oh I see.

Well just had a look on my camera and this is what it says: ZOOM NIKKOR ED 5.8-17.4mm 1:3.0-5.4

Your camera is probably a Nikon Coolpix 2000, which is a 2MP camera with very limited choices of operation. The zoom range is equivalent to 38-114mm on a 35mm camera, which is very limiting to photography of aircraft in flight. Other limiting factors are that you can’t preselect a shutterspeed, ISO values and/or exposure correction factors. Best results will probably be obtained at the AUTO setting or at the BEACH/SNOW scene mode. I’m afraid that for acceptable results you’ll have to look for a camera with longer tele-reach (at least 135-200mm equivalent on a 35mm camera) and a wider choice of operation modes (shutterspeed pre-select, ISO choices, exposure correction, etc.).

I’m a Canon owner myself, but I understand that Nikon View and Nikon PictureProject will both convert Nikon RAW files and are available as free downloads.

The more sophisticated and capable Nikon Capture software is not free.

I’m sure a Nikon user will correct me if this isn’t the case. 🙂

You’re quite right; both the free Nikon View and Picture Project programs will convert Nikon RAW (NEF) files to jpeg or tiff files. Nikon Capture (not free after a trial period) provides the user with much more powerful tools. Another very good free option to convert RAW files is Rawshooter Essentials, which can be downloaded at this site http://esd.element5.com/demoreg.html?productid=545269&languageid=1&stylefrom=545269

I always use the RAW format (NEF’s or compressed NEF’s with Nikon), because it provides the best quality possible and provides you with the best tools to make adjustments afterwards (whitebalance, exposure compensation, sharpening, contrast, etc.). The only drawbacks are that the files are larger than when shooting JPEG’s and that you need a good RAW converter for postprocessing. Rawshooters Essentials is excellent is this respect, but I usually use Nikon Capture 4.4 (and wait for the new Capture NX to be available). Also remember that JPEG is a “lossy” format; you lose a bit of information (quality) every time you have made adjustments and saved the file.

With Nikon (I use a D2x) I’ve found that compressed NEF’s make a nice compromise between uncompressed RAW and JPEG’s. On a 4gb CF card I can accommodate up to 400 compressed NEF pictures.

im still not sure wether a 10d would be better than the 350d.has anyone got any opinions???

I’m not very familiar with Canon DSLR’s, but have you checked this site http://www.dpreview.com ?

In the review of the EOS 350D a comparison is also made with the successor of the 10D, the 20D. A quote from the conclusion: “Image quality is just as good as the more expensive EOS 20D, if you can live with the differences between the two the money saved could buy you a very nice lens.”

Just a few more Viscount pics taken at Schiphol Airport in 1966.

The shutterspeeds are indeed way to low; I even noticed 1/19 sec!! Another problem could be that your camera is not focussing correctly. In the EXIF’s I noticed that the recorded subject distance was only 10.0 meters!

Anyways if you are a avid photographer you shouldn’t really rely on auto everything… It certainly won’t improve you abilities if you let the camera decide for you every single time…

Pesonally I hate touching light plastic camera body as it makes the whole camera feel cheap…

I’ve been an “avid photographer” for more than 40 years and have my own darkroom for colour and B&W developing and printing. Certainly I’m not an auto everything person too and still use my film camera’s quite often (Nikon FM2n with MD11, F4s, F100). I even often use a handheld meter (Weston Master with invercone) for incident light readings, manual focus lenses, etc. However for air to ground photograhy I’ve found that the ability to choose a specific selection of autofocus sensors helps to get more in focus shots than with other methods.

About those cheap light plastic camera’s: correct me if I’m wrong, but according to Olympus themselves the E500 is completely made of polycarbonat (plastic!!) and by comparison to the EOS350D and D50 is the lightest of the three. The weight of the E500 is only 479 g (inc. batt.); compare that to my D2x at 1150 g. However I would in no way regard the E500 as an inferior camera, quite the contrary. Just to set the record straight.