Give this a whirl.... http://stores.ebay.com/ClearGuard-Screen-Protectors

Originally I had simply done --- palm lcd screen protector ---- on Google and
came up with dozens of bargains.

I can vouch for this idea, I use these on my cell phone screen and my C8080
screen; works great. I put the whole screen protector thingy on, then take a
brand new blade exacto knife and cut the excess from a little crevice around the
screen (camera & phone) so I'm not scratching the (camera or phone).

Tim


Where did you buy them? I was at Bureau-en-Gros (Staples to the rest of
you) last night and they were $20 for a pack of 12. Seemed outrageous.
I don't want 12, I figure a few will last a long enough time.

Alan Browne wrote:
Paul Bielec wrote:



I bought self adhensive Palm screen protectors and I installed it over
the LCD of my 300D. You have to cut it out to proper shape but it
works like a charm.


Where did you buy them? I was at Bureau-en-Gros (Staples to the rest of
you) last night and they were $20 for a pack of 12. Seemed outrageous.
I don't want 12, I figure a few will last a long enough time.

Cheers,
Alan


I got a pack of 10 or 12 on liquidation at Future Shop. It was on one of
these tables they put at the entrance.

Destin_FL wrote:

Give this a whirl.... http://stores.ebay.com/ClearGuard-Screen-Protectors

Originally I had simply done --- palm lcd screen protector ---- on Google and
came up with dozens of bargains.

I can vouch for this idea, I use these on my cell phone screen and my C8080
screen; works great. I put the whole screen protector thingy on, then take a
brand new blade exacto knife and cut the excess from a little crevice around the
screen (camera & phone) so I'm not scratching the (camera or phone).


Thanks Tim.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

In article , adm wrote:

"DoN. Nichols" wrote in message
...
In article , Paul Bielec wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:
In article , Paul Bielec wrote:

[ ... ]

When I looked at D70, it gave a rougher impression. I don't remember
exactly what it was, but there was something really cheap about it, the
battery or memory card maybe. Something that didn't fit in on a camera
in that price range.

[ ... ]

The one thing which *I* wish had been a bit better was the
clip-on shield over the LCD display. I lost the first one, when it

[ ... ]

The replacement has been attached by a tether to the left-hand
strap bracket.

[ ... ]

And the tranparent cover DOES have a little hole predrilled

Actually -- the hole is moulded at the same time as the rest
of the features, as *drilling* a hole in a plastic so thin and brittle
would be very likely to break it.

in it for
exactly that purpose. What's more, new ones are pretty cheap.

Agreed -- except that they are seldom in stock where I buy, and
I have to wait a week after ordering one. :-)

( I really should buy another one, mine is cracked from dropping the camera
about 4 foot onto concrete - and that's the ONLY damage )

I think *that* should end the argument about plastic bodies -- at
least as Nikon makes them. I presume that you experienced no subsequent
focus problems or balky mirror.

And I wonder what would have happened if you had a microdrive
in it, instead of a CF card.

I've read complaints about the noise of the autofocus, which
seemed to be complaints about nothing to me, as I had the "28-105mm
f3.5-4.5 D" lens when I got the camera. I did not get the kit lens.

Now that I've added a 50mm f1.4 autofocus, I see where the
complaints come from. It produces significantly more noise than the

[ ... ]

Yup - it's a lens issue.

I have a couple of older (but good) Nikon lenses that aren't AF-S, and are a
little noisy (but not too noisy unless you are photographing funerals full
of easily offended people, near to a PA coupled microphone), and a couple of
AF-S lenses that are really quiet. To be honest, the noise on the mech.
coupled versus AF-S lense is no issue at all for me. Sometimes, with the
AF-S lenses, I have to almost check to see if they have moved at all (and
the sharp focus in the viewfinder ins't an illusion)

The loudest part on the 50mm f1.4 seems to be when the autofocus
starts in the wrong direction and hits a hard stop at the infinity
point before reversing, producing a bit of a "clack" sound.
(Interesting that I got this "normal" lens later, and the 28-105mmm
first (though I already had that one, for another camera, so I skipped
the "kit" lens.) At the moment, the third easy-to-use lens is a 180mm
f2.8 which has been converted to add the CPU to it -- though of course,
no autofocus.

I do also use the Medical Nikor with it -- in manual mode, since
I got the flash sync adaptor, which can handle switching the higher
voltages present in that old built-in flash design. The only problem is
that I am locked out from using the closest setting, because the ISO
(ASA) is too high for that. And I'm not at all sure that I can stack a
neutral density filter with the two close-up lenses which are part of it
for the extreme close-ups. (I also lose the annotation features (e.g.
magnification/reduction ratio), because they are in the area beyond the
sensor.)

Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 13:01:07 -0500, Oliver Costich wrote:

Because the Body with the kit lense is a lot cheaper than the body plus
the cheapest lens you can buy seperatly. Assuming you don't have
limitless resources it's a good way to a get the camera and start taking
pictures while saving up for (and deciding) whatever lens you want next.

Dag

The after rebate cost of the 18-70mm kit lens was $120. Why wouldn't
you buy it.

I was speaking in general and not refering to Anything specific. You are
assuming that rebates are available all over the world and last forever.

Dag