John,

That's close if you're using a 256K card. My camera indicates 72 image possibilities when I use a 256K card. I find though that the camera is using a worst case scenario to get this number. Some images take up more space than others. So, I find that in reality I can get well over 100.

That 72 becomes a 23 when you set the image to RAW.

I also shoot with my D70 at the largest JPEG file format, like Mike. I haven't the software/time to learn how to manipulate the RAW files when I do so much in Photoshop with my JPEG files.

Thanks for the input. I feel reluctant to use jpg format because every time you save, you further compress the file. I may try the large jpg format and once on the computer, convert to a TIFF. Or I may choose to use a second memory card (512k?).

I still haven't purchased the camera yet but plan on soon and am trying to iron out as many questions as possible before I crack open my wallet.

Thanks again for all of your advice. This forum has been a blessing.

John

I have two 512 MB memory cards with room for about 175 large, high quality JPEG images on each. I don't often shoot more than that in a day, but I have the second card as a backup. (I've had two of these CF-type memory cards completely fail on me and become unreadable without warning. Still don't know exactly why that happened.)

Once the images have been transferred to my computer, I store one set on my hard drive to work with and one set on a CD that gets put away and not touched.

I don't save and resave the JPEG images that are on my computer, though, so the issue of re-compression is not a problem. I keep one unchanged copy of each photo and I save any edited versions with a different file name, usually as Photoshop PSD file because by then they usually have many layers.

Yes, I use a lot of CD's to archive the images, and I had to upgrade my hard drive last year too, but those things don't cost much.

Michele,

Were your memory card failures in connection with your D70?

No, they were with my old Minolta, and franky, I think I may have caused the problem myself by not waiting long enough after accessing or storing an image before turning off the camera. At least I hope that was the reason, so I can avoid that problem in the future!

Sorry Jimmie and all you Nikon guys, a Canon person jumping in here.

Jimmie, if you are getting a slight blur and have "old age eyes", which you don't since you are such a young'n... you should have a diopter adjustment on the view finder of your camera, this might need adjustment. The Canon will not let you do a auto focus unless the flash is accessible. It cannot read the focus without the right amount of light. This is really disappointing for me. Sometimes I shoot it in auto then switch to manual just to make sure I have the right focus.

On the Canon, the cable shutter release is plugged into the side where you attach your USB cord. Personally, I don't care if your camera is set in concrete, you never touch it during a longer exposure and the self timer is so annoying, especially when shooting children. I have a cable release which attaches, it was only 40 dollars and functions like a standard SLR's - meaning a 1/2 pressure touch gives you meter readings, press full and you get shutter release. I still keep my eye in the view finder while shooting mainly so light is not seeping in. I have not looked at the remote ones.

Michele, you should check out the Gig memory cards now, I couldn't believe that they are now the same price as 1/2 the memory was a year ago.

I just realized that was the exact problem I am having with the Nikon. I took photos recently of a girl and of her mom. The pics with a flash came out very clear, whereas the others in lower light did not. For the Nikon owners, is there a way to make the model light near the lens turn on. Sometimes it works, sometimes it does'nt. If not, I will have to do the same as Beth, turning to manual. Thanks for bringing it up Beth.

Michele, I did'nt think it would make a difference, but the Nikon Capture software, recommended by Marvin is incredible. It was worth the extra $90. (if interested, I found it cheapest at the time thru CDW) When using RAW or NEF files, it helps adjusts photos better than Photoshop ever did, and quicker. I love the temperature control on it. It changes your original pic to daylight, flash, incandescent, etc... Then you can adjust it further by making it cooler or warmer with a slide bar. After, you can send it to Photoshop for any further manipulations. It may sound like a longer process now, but imho, it's quicker at getting better results. Then you press a button which automatically sends it to Photoshop if you need to do any erasing, copying, cutting and so on. I found it saves time in the long run. Hopefully Marvin can chime in to agree or disagree.

Thanks, Jimmie. Sounds like I'll have to look into that.

About the low light without a flash -- Do you recal what the ISO setting was? You really have to manage this setting in low light. If you leave it at 200 your shutter speed can drop to a point that will allow you to pick up very slight body / camera movement and thus make the picture blurry. I have gone as high as 800 ISO with acceptable results. As far as the other problem -- I don't think I understand.