Perhaps this is related to the large numbers of counterfeit Nikon batteries and battery grips that have been in the market.
OK. So I just tested the Sigma 15mm f2.8 fisheye (one of the listed lenses) on the Nikon Df and it autofocuses just fine. What's going on here?
bossa: I'll think twice before updating my D800e's when the next firmware update comes out. It seems probable that Nikon is deliberately trying to make things difficult for Sigma and it's customers.
Agreed. Firmware updates should add functions to a camera, not remove them.
I have the 15mm f2.8 fisheye and on the D800e I have found that manual focus is more consistently accurate than autofocus with this lens. I will probably use it the same way on the Df so I probably won't send it in.
This is probably due to the D5300 being the first Nikon camera with the new EXPEED4 processor.
molnarcs: The cynicism and negativity on this forum is disheartening. Where do all these Sony trolls come from?
It seems to be part of Sony's business plan. Every forum on this site has Sony trolls.
The yellow K-01 is my bad neighborhood camera. Even potential muggers have doubts about stealing it.
crsantin: The film sims are good, and can improve your digital images and save you time...they do NOT make your digital images look like film images. There is no way you are going to make that happen from a digital image. I've been using DxO film sims for a couple of years now. I like the product but don't have any illusions that these sims are a substitute for real film. For $40 I'll probably upgrade because there are a couple of sims that I really like and use regularly. If I want film images though, I use my film cameras.
I agree very much with this statement. To me the DXO film pack is a way to apply a desired photographic "look" in raw editing. I have a medium format film camera and scanner if I really want the film impression. I don't use it much anymore. To me the real film magic is between the negative and the wet darkroom print and I no longer have that capability. To this old-timer, the film "looks" from DXO, however, are much more appealing than the more instagram looking stuff applied as lightroom presets.
Jan H: i would like to buy dx0 as a successor for my CS5 but wonder if it also offers a feature like bridge. Ik don´t like the idea having al my photo´s (about 50.000) being imported in dx0 first.
DXO uses an image browser which works with folders on your hard drive. There is no need to import as in Lightroom. It is usually DAM functions which require import and DXO doesn't have any such functions.
JJMacks: Actually I think Adobe may have made my life a little easier with this announcement.
Updating to the last few new releases of Photoshop has involved a lot of work on my part. There are un-fixed bugs in CS6 that effect me. CS6 still crashes regularly in Adobe module ScripUIFlex.dll there is nothing I can do the resolve that problem. If has been reported to Adobe.
While some of the new announced features in CC sound like they may be somewhat useful they are not compelling. No mention of better stability or bug fixes were announce.
It seems like the right time to regress to CS3 cut my losses and lighten my work load.
I have had similar issues with CS6 crashing my computer. I do still have CS5 on my computer so perhaps I should regress as well.
Don Karner: Just went to adobe and B&h to try to buy an upgrade to CS6. Can't find it anywhere. I guess I waited to long.
My CS5 still works, but I wonder for how long......
If it's any consolation to you, none of the new features in CS6 from CS5 have ever worked when I try to access them on my computer. They completely crash the video card.
milnor: My goodness what a whiny bunch. Photoshop isn't a birthright, and Adobe can sell it any way they like. If anything I expect that y'all should be thrilled at this, because some alternative products might actually get some new customers and those companies might possibly consider plowing some of that revenue into development (good luck with that). Personally I've been using Creative Suite Premium/Design Premium since the 1.1 release, but I signed up for Creative Cloud the minute it was available and haven't regretted it for a minute. No software is forever -- you tried running Photoshop 3.0 on modern hardware? And for anyone who said they wanted to go back to film, I suppose you're thinking of just pulling out that perpetual supply of Ektacolor chemistry that you bought back in 1987, right? Seriously, before I switched to digital I easily spent more than $50/month in film and developing costs.
I've worked in IT for over 30 years. You want to see usurious pricing, look to SAS Institute.
Also at the same time look at what has happened to usage of SAS internationally. I work with international researchers on a routine basis and fewer and fewer of them have ever heard of SAS.
(unknown member): Adobe should just cut staff, stop development and reduce marketing, that way, it could be much less expensive!
Oh wait, then everyone here would start whining about how there are no new features bla bla bla...
Pathetic bunch of whiners!
Most of the new features in Adobe photoshop haven't worked for some time. Every new feature in CS6 crashes my computer if I try to use it.
Deano255: It sounds like a lot of people who are complaining the loudest are people who have pirated (i.e. stolen) the software and seem to feel they are entitled to it and upgrades forever. Do you steal your cameras too? Sorry, no sympathy here. Your piracy just drives up the costs for us who do pay. Adobe is a company selling intellectual property, not a welfare institution.
Do you have any idea how much money I have shelled out to Adobe over the years? It appears that Adobe's bootlickers are even more arrogant than they are. Why should I legally commit to paying Adobe for the foreseeable future without any guarantee of quality service? Does Adobe seem like a trustworthy partner to hitch your wagon to?
I've been considering looking at alternative RAW converters other than Adobe's. Now that it will be a necessity the question seems to be which ones to try. Meanwhile I will just use CS6 until Adobe comes to its senses or a solid alternative appears.
Suddenly everything else I was considering seems a lot more reasonable.
Looks like a rocket launcher. I wouldn't use it near any military bases.