Abraxx: hm interesting, but why would I choose it over the Canon one? Its heavier and not significantly cheaper....and the Canon one is already extremely good.
Maybe because the Canon one does not fit on a Nikon?Lens mount: Nikon F (DX)
Just failed on some ooc pictures of mine..
pekr: 10USD, 12 EUR - what kind of idiot can set such conversion rate?
12,3 € = 16,67 US$So you are saying local taxes make a +66% difference? Maybe you should've checked your schoolbook before spreading such nonsense.We are talking about a DOWNLOAD. Not a real item which you'd have to ship around the world.I personally wouldn't RENT that software if it would only cost me 5€/month. I would always feel trapped with no chance of getting out without big losses. I bought CS6 and will use it until either Adobe gets out of the cloud or I swap to a different software.
Hugo600si: Just thinking, install it in a VM as your second machine, make a snapshot of that VM without internet connection. use for 99 days, then back to the snapshot version (after you stop paying). Start of a solution? A computer does not 'know' what date it is, its just looking at a few 'counters'.Gets around the OS upgrade problem as well, that VM will be fixed.
Reality is I'll probably not bother, if they do not want my business I'm not going to waste my money with them.
It's even much easier. The reality is: if you have the possibility to go x days without online-connection there will always be a workaround to crack it. So they are not even harming the illegal copys. They're even making them more viable because they won't have to bother with this online-reactivation. It's just like with computergames, where the honest users are being more and more pressured into some strange online-bondage (including server-outs which result in game downtime) and the illegal copies just work.
rrr_hhh: I would grant one thing to Adobe :
1) Their software is mature, they don't have a lot to add;2) However they have continual adjustments to achieve in order to keep up with the new new cameras, hardwares and OS issued.This less visible work has to be financed too. Until now Adobe relied on the upgrades to get cash, but with a mature PS, customers are skipping them. A monthly fee takes care of that.
But Adobe blundered the introduction of the new model :1) They ask an unfair price from photographers, dissuading not only the occasional hobbyist, which Adobe didn't target, but also a lot of freelancers whose financial situation is often worse. 2) They are introducing the new system brutally without leaving choice : instead of convincing users that the new model is better by attractive and flexible offerings, they are alienating the consumers who fill trapped and thus rebell. 3) Confidence in Adobe products is shaken : could we loose access to our files if we stop paying the fee ?
I may still have my .DNG file. But what about the hours of work i spent on the layers? I'd have to start everything again. _From scratch._ I'm still looking for a fitting comparison in real life, but it looks like Adobe was really the first to come up with a model that would rob you of your work once you stop paying them. And that is nothing to be proud of.
I've just been to a "Comsol"-seminar and learned how they make use of a subscription-system there. And this would be the only system i'd ever use:You pay for a lifetime-licence but get only 12m of full support. After that you may pay 20% of the price again for another 12m of full support. If you don't, your programm will still work like before but if you find any more bugs you may keep them for your own. Considering that the software has major updates onces every 6m this sounds like a fair deal to me. But seriously: 20€/m is way to much for me.
NJHr: This camera is currently the bargain of the century here in the UK. The price has dropped down to £319 with the £50 cash back promotion running. I am buying as soon as I have some cash, hello Pentax you got yourself a new customer. I am sure you will make back the money on the limited pancakes I will undoubtedly buy.
I personally dont own a 18-135mm but since i'm planning to "trade up" to one of the newer models i've been thinking about that lens for some time already. First though is that with 18-135mm it covers most you'll need on a normal trip with low weight and compact size. Secondly, it's supposed to be better than the normal 18-55/50-200 WR-Kits. But overall it's not that good (in terms of value) if bought alone. If you want that one "jack of all trades lens" the 18-135 wr is probably right for you. But buy it in the bundle. I've come to the decision that i'll wait for the next DA* Zoom (hopefully at the end of 2013) and until then i'll be good with only a 18-55mm WR and a 55 DA* for messy weather. (And probably a 100mm DFA WR Macro) But then again I already have a pretty well rounded lens setup.I would not go with a super-zoom without WR on my WR camera. That just ruins the gain of having a camera you could use in any situation without having to take extra care due to say heavy rain.
Take the 35mm 1:2.4. You lose the aperture but you win the stabilization. The 40mm is a complete different class of lens. And i'm not only talking about the price. I don't know about the optical performance of the Nikon lens, but the Pentax is pretty good even wide open.
HubertChen: About missing Audio Jack is irrelevant:Noise of AF will be picked up with any camera build in microphone. This is why using external microphone for production is essential. Once you make this effort, adding an external recorder is actually reducing trouble: Say you record an interview. Build a single clip that holds microphone and recorder ( still very small ) and clip it to the speaker. Now you have no cables between model and camera ( you may trip over it and they would be in the movie, so really great to get rid of them). In fact battery life is so great, you can keep it running all the time. No need to turn it on and off. To make finding your recording clips a snap as well as synch audio and video, all you need to do is clap your hands at beginning and end of recording your clip.
I wrote this as a reply before, but thought this is worth repeating.
As soon as you start working on projects with multiple cameras (which I already did often enough) you'd better not use a internal mic AT ALL. Make a sync-spot to sync up your recordings and you work from there. So if you are working semi-pro on location with more than just one handheld camera the missing mic jack is no handicap at all.What bothers me more is the battery-life and the lack of external power-supply for longer shots. But then again, you can just swap real quick and jump right back in. (with the hassle of syncing up again, but this time without a planned sync-spot)
Camp Freddy: Hmm, ticks a number of boxes for me on price, relative IQ to price and not least weather proofing. But how many lenses are weather proofed ?
Any WR, DA* and AW lens.18-55mm WR, 50-200 WR, 18-135mm WR, DFA 100mm Makro WRDA* 16-50, DA* 60-250, DA* 50-135, DA* 55mm, DA* 200mm, DA* 300mm, 560mm AW and probably some more which i forgot...
Alizarine: I guess this review will never finish.. seeing that the D600 and 6D will probably get theirs finished first.
Is anyone _really_ surprised about that? I mean seriously, there are so many other cameras out there. Why on earth should anyone buy a Pentax? The review and every other test i've seen so far looks very promising, but then again, CaNikSOly just make way more advertising.Somehow this changes the opinion i had about dpr being "independent".