Utard

I have been really happy with what's down in my sig. If I could do it again I would do the RF-7 front SW-115 sub RC-64 center and side/rear surrounds just the RB-41. That way it would be kick a$$ for movies and music.

Just got the Oppo 103D the other day (12-27-13) off of amazon. My first impression on the D part (darbee) is that it is a waste of money. I am using this on the HT in the sig. I played with the darbee on/off a few times and a certain points you could see doing a little something? I am going to say if you have a good receiver, TV and BRP the whole darbee part was a waste of my $100. As for the player itself I am happy with that. So far the things I like. Plays WAV on the USB. Any one know the max USB thumb drive you can use? Does Utube. Seems like it will play any type of CD. But one thing I really like is I have a 7.1 system and when I was using my PS3 and played a 6.1 BRD it did not send any sound to the rear surround. With the oppo it will force the the 6th track to both the rear surround. One thing I don't like is it does not do the Amazon videos. Already have it so there is no way I will pay for netflix also. I am really surprised how this thing is packaged. It is the kind of packaging you would expect when you paid $600 for it. And to boot it comes with a carry bag. Not sure I would ever use it however. Back to the Darbee. With my TV is seems useless. But may be it is designed to be used for crappy TV's? Or maybe poor source material like older DVD's? All I know is with my TV and a new Blu ray it seems pointless. Anyone have any real luck with the darbee doing something really good? I was thinking of putting my music on a 2 TB SSD drive and hook that up to the USB. Anyone tried this? Be nice to find out if this will work before I drop the money on the hard drive.

I have been thinking of getting one of these. Any issues? How long to the batteries last so far? Does it do the speakerphone thing automatically? I hope not.

Most of those sounds remind me of my Tibetan bowls https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b05pGueHux8 no that is not me

How are these working out? Are you still happy with these?

Thats a lot of speaker going on there. So off topic but are the 2 center ones the center channel? I was considering doing the same type of thing. How did you wire it? And here I thought I was crazy for having 4 subs?

Its not bad. 2 up front and 2 behind the couch. Sometimes you get kind of a weird feeling inside from them. The seating position is in the sweet spot for the room.

So right now I have a R II system with 4 RW-12d. I was considering selling 2 of them and getting a SW-115. My question is has anyone paired a RW-12d with a SW-115? I don't see any problems with this but just wanted to double check with anyone that may have done this.

Not sure the differences in brands but I use auto surround detect for movies, music pure direct and tv D PL IIz Height.

The goal of photography is to get it as close as possible but shooting in RAW and using Photoshop provides the ability to tweak and fine tune the image. One great advantage of shooting RAW is you are dealing with uncompressed images and if you overexposed / underexposed, you can easily recover what might be an unusable image otherwise. And therein lies the debate As far as I am concerned as soon as you put it in photoshop you have lost the art of photography and now created a computer generated image. You start with a little change here and a little change there and before you know it you don't have the original image. Make the arms thinner, boobs bigger where does it end? So with that being said just forgo the camera and just use the computer. But this is just my opinion and I have a very strong one about it.

I don't really care for RAW. If you can't get the shot at the time you are taking it then so be it. I am not a believer in Photoshop.

Nice. looks good. And the color looks good. What settings did you end up using for this? I have not really used the video on mine much. I got for the still camera that just happens to do video. Now all you need is one of those stability holder things to make any movement smoother. http://www.amazon.com/Opteka-SteadyVid-Stabilizer-Camcorders-Improved/dp/B008UUPUPM/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1355715362&sr=8-9&keywords=video+stabilizer Not sure what size card you got? But you might want a big one for video? I ended up getting a 32 GB for mine. I have never got the shot counter to drop below 999 even after a 4000 photo weekend. I think i figured I could get 6000-7000 photos on a 32 GB flash card?

I am confused. Do you have 7 or 9 speakers? Not including the subs. From what you said you only have 7 speakers so you should not worry about height speakers. If you have 7 plus subs just do the normal 1 center, 2 front, 2 side surround, 2 rear surround and your subs. I have basically a 9.4 system with the front heights and I don't feel the heights are worth the waste of time. If you ever want to listen to them you have to change the avr to dolby PL II z Height setting. I just leave it in an auto detect for surround sound. So I end up never listening to the front heights.

Dtel/Islander I was surprised at how well the D7 did with the stars myself. I need to get the mount to put on my telescope and i bet it would even be 10 x's better. I had the original canon rebel slr and even it did pretty but hardly compares to the newer technology of the D7. With your little gadget i bet you could do a 4 minute exposure at a lot lower iso with good results. You should try pointing the camera at the north star and do this. You get a nice spiral effect with the stars.

For this I would learn how to use the custom white balance. Or at least test with the pre set light settings. I did this same thing at my nephews b-ball games. I did not adjust for the lighting and it came out terrible. Every thing was yellowish. They make some special white balance sheets but I have just used plain white paper with good results.

The main thing with any brand of newer lens is the technology. Just like with the audio (7.1, 9.2, 3D, Imax) the newer the better. Newer lenses have better coatings and glass placements. And the image stabilization is amazing for telephoto lenses. With out it on older 35 MM telephoto shots HAD to be on a tripod. Now you can get away with out using a tripod.

That is fine:) Glad to share my stuff. Just don't sell it.

So if you zoom in on those photo's you will already notice the stars are streaking. That is what is giving the slight out of focus look to them. One was at 45 and the other at 63 seconds. Now I did take a lot of photos that night and did notice to really get that galaxy look with the starish looking clouds it really needed to be on ISO 6400. But that really hurts the quality. Ideally you want a gyro mobober so you can have the camera track the stars. I have a small telescope that can do this but I have not purchased a mount to put my camera yet. When you can do that then you could put the camera at ISO 100 or 200 and have an exposure for an hour and get the same effect put it would be better quality and no star streak.

When in TV mode you tell the camera how long you want the exposure to be and it adjusts other settings to make it work. So like on a really over cast day at a water fall you could set at 1-2 seconds and it will figure out every thing else. So you get the nice flow of water but not over exposed. Its just a quick cheat instead of figuring out full manual when you don't have time.

If you look on the right on the photo with the flash on the rocks that is andromeda galaxy. TV is for timer Value. I checked both of these and they where 45 and 63 second exposure with 4.0 F, 6400 ISO at 17 MM.

Its about a 3 hour drive from SLC but this is where I do my rockhounding. I look for Topaz, Garnets, Red Beryl and other gems and minerals. Just so happens it is very remote and has the best view of the night sky I have ever seen.

I sent them to dtel Hopefully the files are not too big dtel. I use Google Chrome and it does not seem to work very will with this web sites forum software. Just in order to make spaces from line to line I have to type a bunch of crap or it gets all put in to one big lump. JL Sargent I will send to you also so you can see the shooting info. Also the photo software zoombrowser that comes with the canon works good if you have never used it before.

I don't seem to be able to put photo's on this forum so it you have an email I can send you a shot that has all the shooting data in it. Just PM me with the email if you want to do that. Or if someone can put up photo's I could send you a jpeg. But it was something like mode TV...30 to 45 seconds shutter..... ISO 6400 .......F4.0......auto white.......most important is a clear sky away from citys. Closest city to this shot was delta utah. A city of about 3500. I was an hour west of there. Middle of nowhere.

That has a nice ring to it.

Nice! You are going to love that camera. When you are shooting at 8 fps it is crazy fast. Talking about low light I have been able to take some amazing photos of the milky way galaxy with mine.