I honestly don't believe the ZD50-200 ever came with a plastic tripod adapter, it's far too heavy.  I've never heard of anyone complaining about a broken plastic tripod adapter on a 50-200 and I belong to just about every Oly forum on the Internet.

The lens is a joy to use, and if you remove the tripod adapter it'll lighten it up perhaps enough for you to use handheld...with plenty of practice, that is.  You'll of course get better results with a sturdy tripod.  I've gotten great results with it on both E-1 and E-500 bodies.  It also produces fairly decent bokeh.  A big plus for the lens is that it's weatherproof; you can shoot with it in the rain all day long with no fear, and living in Oregon,  I have.  Of course, you'll have to have an E-1 body to pull that one off.

Admittedly though, I find myself using the 40-150 more.  I'm seriously thinking about selling my 50-200 and replacing it with a 7-14.  But what I'm really waiting for are the specs and reviews on the E-3.  I may hop on over to Canon if the cameras aren't seriously improved.  My hopes are high though, based on the images I've seen from the E-410.  Higher ISO perfomance has become critical for me lately, as well as increased buffer/fps.

This is not to say Oly cameras take crappy pictures.  They take outstanding pictures.  I've tried them all, and I feel the Oly E series still produces the most accurate, vibrant colors, with Fuji S3/5 following a close second.

As you probably know, the E-510 and E-3 will have IS in-body, so using your new lens at the long end will become much easier if you are overcome with upgrade-itis and choose to buy the next-gen Oly body.  There is of course a newer version of the ZD50-200 on the near horizon, with much improved focus speed, but you'll have to buy the new Oly body that supports those electronics, presumably the E-3 and/or E-510.

Be sure to update the firmware for your new lens: http://www.olympusamerica.com/e1/sup_firmwareupdates.asp but you probably already knew that.
 
Probably more info than you ever needed, but I like to read myself type - lol.

Warm Regards, and enjoy your new glass.

Wow, Stacey, you have really nice...teeth!

LMFAO!

This entire thread has me in stitches!  I've seen rediculous, pointless threads posted here over the years...hundreds of 'em...some of 'em started by yours truly...but this one takes first prize!  You've won a Renderosity Barf Bag, embossed with your screen name!

Thanks for the much needed laugh, and congratulations on your win! 

And yes, do as suggested: remember the starving children of Rwanda as you puke your Cap'n Crunch all over your keyboard!

Actually, I believe this one is several years old.

It's 24 hours from the last upload, not a calendar day.

Because I shoot 100% RAW, I always postwork.  I see nothing wrong with correcting the limitations of either the camera or my creativity at the moment I pressed the shutter.  IMHO, the process of taking a photograph doesn't end with the pressing of the shutter, but the final save in Photoshop.

Ahhh...I see.  I little research on my part shows many edu surveys use this service.  Kinda cool, actually.

Kent State?  Then why is the "survey" at WSU?

Be aware though that the folder number where the thumb resides will change over time.  When I used to post photos I believe it was around folder_134.  You'll have to be dilligent in checking this.

EDIT: To clairfy, the folder where a certain thumb is located now will stay the same, it's just that the folder number for future thumbs will change as they fill up or for whatever the reason the filders change numbers.

It must be on your end, as there is an Aussie member in the Photography Forum here who doesn't seem to have the same problems...

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/browse.php?user_id=341241

When was the last time you ran Crap Cleaner on your computer?

http://www.ccleaner.com/

No, that Pepsi winning was real and I actually cashed in on it.  But I gave the $500,000 to the git in Nigeria so he'd stop e-mailing me.

*"...tightly secure ISP server"

I have yet to encounter a "tightly secure" ISP mail server.

Or do you mean domain host?

I have unlimited e-mail accounts through my domain host and can configure each box to accept e-mail from those I specify; everything else is flat out rejected and sent back as user unknown.  Most decent domain hosts offer this type of configuration.  An ISP, forget it.  Verizon is my ISP and I believe I'm allowed up to five e-mail accounts.  I can set one up and within a week I'll get spam.  Because of this, I've abandoned any thought of using my ISP's (Verizon) mail server.  The only thing I use Verizon's mail servers for is sending e-mail through my domain host, not to receive.

For Renderosity, I use a Yahoo account which I don't care about.  I never use it at all.  As a matter of fact, I can't even remember the password for it.

If I were you (if you're not already), I'd try a domain host.  Buy yourself a domain; domain hosting is dirt cheap these days.  Just make certain the web interface is decent and the e-mail configuration is of high-quality with decent features.  And go with a well-known host.

Regards.

Quote - > Quote - Why do you want to block users from making comments?

To get rid of the backslappers?

LMFAO!

Oh Gawd how I want to comment on this!  LOL!

Stacey adjusted the server time so it never looks like she's late for work :)

Quote - But did it ever occur to you that perhaps that Renderosity isn't high-up on the user's priorities?  That they have a life that exists outside of the galleries and forums?

Bingo!

I can imagine hundreds upon hundreds of members here who fit into this category.  While many members here seem to live their entire lives at Rendo, many stop by to simply enjoy art.  I can visit a museum and marvel without saying a word.  The curator never requires comments, and always has the door wide open.

As mentioned in this thread, there will always be the high possibility of your work, if worthy, of being ripped.  If you don't want this to happen, don't upload, or, to reduce the likelihood, post at a smaller size or add a distinct watermark.

To punish the quiet members of Rendo out of one's personal fear does not make sense; not everyone is an art ripper.

While Billy's idea seems to be a solution, one must remember that Rendo is all about vanity, and it's a feature that'll never be used because of that fact.  In this case, I must side with Stacey that if implemented, it'll have to be all, or none.

IMHO, forget the entire idea.  It won't stop ripping, nor will it even slow it.  But it will punish the innocent; that is guaranteed.

Regards.