pellinger: Adobe could easily use this periodic on-line license checking simply to prevent piracy and ensure users have purchased their software. That could work perfectly well with minimal inconvenience and still allow users to decide when to stick with superseded capability indefinitely (at no further cost) and when to pay for an upgrade. As it is Adobe are just being unreasonably greedy and will certainly deter many potential customers.
no because the pirates will figure out how to disable the monthly check just like the currently disable the key check or make keygens. It's not preventing anything of the sort
the dealbreaker for photographers is the screen resolution.
As much as I hate ios, apple and their proprietary/closed architecture I'm considering an ipad because the screen blows away *ANY* other tablet out there. The asus Transformer HD is pitiful by comparison.
Eurodynamica: Most maufacturers appear to be a little lost at the moment.
Technology is set to sweep their feature sets away leaving a world where the sensors are better than the lenses and most everything you really need can be had for a few hundred bucks, probably at Walmart. Good news for customers, bad news for formerly premium manufacturers like Hasselblad.
Sony seems to be the on-going winner having a firm grasp on the technology and the consumer marketing headspace.
sony is not clearly the winner. Citations please? As far as I can tell, the Nex series does not have any significant market penetration compared to the rest of the mirrorless cameras and their UI is a disaster.
He can respond all he wants. It's still just a $1300 Nex 7 in a designer cover.
Check the review http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Hasselblad-Lunar-First-Impressions-Review.htm
What a joke. This reminds me of when they were faltering during the infancy of the digital age and they responded by offering their standard cameras in yellow and red faux-leather coverings...
Jan Kritzinger: My only complaint is that the lens is slightly bulky for the body form factor - give us a 23/2.8 APS-C RX10 the size of the RX100, for $1k! Come on Sony, Do it!
even if they did, why would you want it from sony? It'd just be dumbed down and incompatible with every well known, standard accessory. I'm surprised sony doesn't have their own custom tripod mount.
guyfawkes: I often have a wry smile when I read comments about the ratio of body to lens size of the Nex series of cameras. In reality, having a manual zoom lens the size of the kit lens makes for a very comfortable handling experience.
In reality, the kit zoom is no larger than many APS-C optics, it is just that a Nex 5 body is smaller than most. It may look odd, but just handle one to see what I mean.
i had a nex 5 and several of the bigger zoom lenses and found it extremely awkward compared to a dslr so I sold it and went back. Seems like a fad to me. The advantages of the small, mirrorless body are mostly lost when you tack on the big zoom lens and additionally, it becomes awkward and lens heavy to hold. Wearing it on a strap is awkward too
I have taken this course and it's amazing. Clay has a wealth of information on posing and lighting. $199 is ridiculously cheap to spend a day with someone of Clay's experience. I would be willing to take this course several times.
MarkJordan: Though I am in agreement with the premise of seeing and creating with one light, I am not sure the images are the best examples of it. So sorry. Regardless, thanks for sharing and getting so many minds to contemplate the fundamentals. God knows we can all use it.
How so? I thought the images perfectly conveyed what the author was writing about.
I should also mention that the program often hangs on startup and even killing the task and attempting to restart fails. When that happens you have to reboot. If you search google and adobe forums you'll see this is a pretty common problem.
Kampbyll Photography: PS is ok , but my view point is very simple , PS to me is an excuse not to buy better equipment , i personally would rather have the best equipment than there is no need to waste my time in PS , i have no need to go to Photo Shop , my pictures look great like they are , and those who waste time there should just upgrade there camera , better yet take better pictures!
What plugins don't work? I'm using portraiture, Nik, Topaz and perfect portrait though onone software either didn't work or I need to reinstall it. For the other plugins, all I did was copy the folders over from my CS5 installation.
the content-aware move, extend and patch are utter crap. They plain don't work on 21MP Canon 5D MK II files though they seem to work great on web sized images.
And they've wrecked the patch tool. Even in normal mode it doesn't work properly. I have to resort to CS5 when I want to use the patch tool.
I hope they get this fixed before the actual release because it's almost useless as is
haha, these manufacturers crack me up grasping at straws to differentiate themselves in the marketplace. Like i'm going to have my laptop at the beach to transfer pix from underwater to it.
How about a camera with a coffee dispenser?
Jack A. Zucker: I'd really love to try this. i cancelled my canon 24-70L lens after reading too many reports of softness. However, tamron really screwed me on a 18-270 which had stuck focus. I contacted their customer support twice and both times received an auto-responder with a promise of a followup which never happened. Not sure I'd trust them for support on a $1300 lens. Buyer beware...
problem is, the issue didn't develop until well past the CC return policy period. It was 3 months old so they should have supported it.
I'd really love to try this. i cancelled my canon 24-70L lens after reading too many reports of softness. However, tamron really screwed me on a 18-270 which had stuck focus. I contacted their customer support twice and both times received an auto-responder with a promise of a followup which never happened. Not sure I'd trust them for support on a $1300 lens. Buyer beware...
Absolutic: Tamron. I've gone through my share of Tamron lenses and I believe it will have typical Tamron's attributes:
1) Sharpness - almost as good as OEM (Canon or Nikon)2) VC - superior to both Nikon/Canon (although they don't have in that range)3) Contrast - always inferior to Nikon/Canon. Often yellow cast to photos. But can be dealt with in PP4) AF - this is a biggie. Tamron has placed Ring AF in their latest 2 lenses (finally) but it just does not work nearly as good as Nikon and Canon AF (and Sigma is faster too). For some - it does not mater, it is silent but it is noticeably slower than OEM.
That is why I think, Tamron needs to price this thing much less, like $700 to make it work.
h0tsauce, IS isn't so important in this focal range.
price is too close to canon. The IS feature won't be enough to cut into canon's sales IMO. At this focal length, IS is not as important. It needs to be $1k to tempt folks from canon's offering IMO unless canon discontinues the 24-70 2.8 MK I
Good article but frankly the jpg compression artifacts ruin the examples. You should consider uploading images with less compression. This is particularly evident in the Iris blur where the "after" picture suffers from such bad compression artifacting that one might mistakenly think the blur effect created the problem.
ybizzle: As a guy who has been into photography for many years, I can tell you that these cheap little tricks will never replace the true bokeh effect of a fast lens. At the same time though, it's a nice tool to have for those who can't afford fast lenses and want to simulate that effect in their photos.
Silly posting (about good glass). The point of photoshop is to enhance creativity. Go check out vincent versace sometime. He uses good glass but does stuff in post processing that no single exposure with a 36mp camera and the best glass could ever do without post processing.
Hire a studio photographer and take some real world studio pictures of skin tones, flowers, etc.