Camera review herehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pPMYFOy3No
Looks promising. Supports DNG as well, far as I know.
Looking forward to a camera review of the Z5, noise with that many MP vs sensor size might be a problem ? Raw available ?
marc petzold: What keeps me away from LT for ages: That damn catalogue everything thing, and then it's way sluggish from operation & behaviour, Adobe should really speed things up.
Cataloguing is a feature I prefer and like.
This is why I will never be a photographer, I don't take photos like this.
dlkeller: B&H doesn't list VC as one of the features in the Sony version. If this is true Sony A mount users are being screwed again. Hope it isn't true as it looks like a lens I would buy--but not if VC is left of my version.
"B&H doesn't list VC as one of the features in the Sony version."
Good, most if the A mounts have it built in. I will wait and see if it's okay, I was looking at the Sony 70-400G II. I hope it's better than the Sigma 50-500 I had on my Nikon D300
Moblile support ? I find myself at the froums less and less because of no support for tapatalk and goign to other forums becasue of ease of use, I would suspect I am 50% on my phone or tablet ? You're pushign me away
57even: Since the market is already well represented with existing products from other makers, it is not surprising that the reaction to this camera is a bit lukewarm as it misses out a lot of things (viewfinder, flash, accessory port) that the others have.
I guess all of these could be addressed in future models. However whereas Nikon were pretty clear about the technical direction on launch, Canon are not.
Almost certainly means future versions will compete with the Rebel line or even replace it, hence they don't want to play their hand too early for fear of damaging sales.
However it does rather imply that Nikon will have to think seriously about a larger sensor MILC camera, even it's based on the F mount.
That doesn't tmake any sense ? If you're not going to mount your exisiting lenses than the World is your Oyster in terms of choice eg NEX7 etc etc Surely you would not buy it just because it says Canon ?
rocklobster: What are you guys whinging about? - this is about as small as you are going to get in a camera with a sensor of this quality.
NO there isnt a built in flash and NO there is no EVF but I have owned an E-MP1 for a while and these are a non-issue to me as the accessory port is the best solution for these items as I use them infrequently.
But, if I am allowed one complaint it may be directed at almost all mirrorless cameras is that contrast focus AF does not work well in poor light especially at medium to long distaces where the focus assist lamp is ineffective.
What about phase detection focus modes on NEX 5R and NEX6 Canon EOS M etc ?
Gorgeous, one small criticism if I may, I think it needs more leading space to move into, rather than have it centred but that's just my amateur eye.
Ross Murphy: I check to make sure my files have made it safely over before formatting my card, but in general this is pretty much the same thing I do and recommend to fellow photogs, I do a rename later with TIFF or JPG.
Edit, I do have a database for each year, otherwise it would get very large.
Large, it's supposed to be, it's a DBMS referencing the photos, so it's actually a comparatively tiny file. Having seperate catalogues is a poor decision I think. Just tag 2012 with 2012 photo's, then if all you want to see is 2012, search for the tag 2012 and they will all be displayed... If you have tagged every photo you took of a flower with flower, then you can display them all by searching for that tag, or 2012 and flower or... the cataloguing feature is one of the huge strengths of LR.
Thauglor: I bought LR3 for its many other features. I don't like the catalog feature. I find it to be completely unnecessary. Like the article states, many of us have cataloged our images by folder, by date, or otherwise, making lightroom's catalog feature not only redundant, but annoying. It seems it 'wants' to catalog my images, and will not take no for an answer.
Would it be a big deal to browse to the photo I would like to edit, do the edit, and then simply save the edited file in a folder of my choosing ?
Doesn't seem like to much to ask for those of us that prefer to work that way.
I used to work that way but ended up realising I was fighting LR. It's supposed to do that for you, so I organised LR to put the images in the folders I want for me. I also use Tags and flags. If you want to persist with that workflow model maybe ditch LR ?? Use Explorer/Finder, PS and ACR (or other software) or re-evaluate your workflow ?
RPJG: How do people manage their catalog when they take RAW + JPEG?
I guess one option is to just ignore the JPEGs, as to a greater or lesser degree they'll be "inferior" to properly-developed RAW images. But if I want to manage both image formats within LR, I don't know enough about functionality like stacking to know if there's an easy way to manage RAW + JPEG side-by-side.
(This is similar to nixda's question below.)
Like you, I used to shoot JPG & RAW but then changed after spending some time with LR
Why keep the JPG, within a few secs I can export the JPGs out from the RAW files from LR. You don't have to do vast amounts of PP on every image in LR, it is there is you wan tot though You can just keep the RAW as is and apply a couple presents when you want the JPG.