nitroman: Don't Getty realise that if they cut off the hands that feed them, they will eventually go hungry.
Getty has almost single handedly destroyed the traditional stock industry and continues to hammer nails into the coffin ... Thanks again Getty.
you seem to think that the Carlyle Group is interested in stock photography.
they are not.
no money for the photographer from the advertising.but money when your image is licensed.
well you know what this advertising space is worth.companys who produce nothing are worth billions today because they reach millions of people (facebook and co).free advertising on dpreview if they use the embedded viewer.
and getty will gather all kind of infos from this move.the google of the photography world.
vFunct: You actually would make money if they monetized this via embedded advertising.
and the real reason would be not making money with these embedded images but gathering INFORMATION.
this sounds plausible:
Henry M. Hertz: as far as i read on istock this is for getty editorial images only.
forget it was wrong info.... the "use" must be editorial.
you mean when someone licensed that pic because it was shown as embedded picture on a website? yes.
but im not sure if getty will let you participate on the money they get from showing the embedded pictures.and when then it´s maybe 1-5 cents.
lucrative when you have millions of images like getty but not for a sinlge photographer selling at getty.
as far as i read on istock this is for getty editorial images only.
does this applie to istock photos too?
i still have a few hundred images on istock.never cared to delete my account.
another way to cut off the photographer from the profits.getty is making money with your work but you don´t see a dime.....
Carlos Loff: Stop talking and launch cameras with your top specs and fair prices - DONT YOU WANT TO SELL ANYMORE ???
lol.. are you joking or are you just clueless?how can you ask the market leader such a silly question?
canons sells more then all other companys.
you better ask nikon that question.
marginal D4s updates and a digital frankenstein camera that´s a pain to use.
another lame interview....
i don´t know why the interviewers never ask the questions that come up on every forum.
as only one example... why not asking why canon is still using 7 year old sensor manufacturing? a 500nm process.they improve sensors... well not as much as others do.
the 18MP sensor get´s a bit long in the tooth even with dual pixel AF.
the 1DX sensor is fantastic and it´s a wonder canon can do this with a process that is at least 3 steps behind sonys manufacturing process.
still the question is when will canon update to the same manufacturing process as, for example, sony?
canon builds the best overall DSLR´s. i love my 1D X.but the real question is .... when will canon improve sensor perfomance?with improved DR and low read noise of current sony sensors canon would be unbeatable.
exdeejjjaaaa: any oils drops on sensor ? those new mirrors..
i think that´s a feature for nikons now....
mantra: hibut can't understand one thinga friend of mine bought the d4 about 4 or 5 month ago and it was not cheap!!now nikon releases the D4swhat's about the d4? it's already devalued or?thanks
yeah but you get 1 FPS more with the 4Ds and useless high ISO. that must be worth something....
tvstaff: It would be nice if Canon did the same and replaced EVERY mirror box in the 1DX. A $7,000 body should not have oil and debris issues. PERIOD. How can Nikon do this for a consumer camera and Canon is leaving it's pros hanging???? If Nixon ' s new D4 is a winner, canon will lose a lot of pros!!!
there is no issue on the 1DX. thats the "problem" you clown.
i have one since 2012.
lap777: Maybe Nikon didn't have a permanent, tested and good solution before now, so it wouldn't have helped to repair all the D600's before now. Just saying..
according to nikon there was no issue.....
JohnEwing: Glad I bought mine on the Rockwell Principle - get a refurb. New shutter, pristine sensor, no problems. Great camera. Who needs a 610?
Concerning my *next* camera, I'd be very happy if people started buying just-out kit right now, so that I can buy another refurb next year or the one after, with all the problems ironed out.
Seriously, though (well, I wasn't exactly joking) I'm glad to see this move. It speaks of a will to better customer relations, and is vaguely reminiscent of Fuji's updating the X100 firmware after the camera had been discontinued, the difference being that Fuji's gesture had goodwill behind it and Nikon's has more than a touch of contrition, albeit unacknowledged.
your not ashamed to write that name?oh i forgot your a nikon user....
reginalddwight: I shoot with Nikon but they have easily become the laughingstock of camera companies.
One month after the D600 announcement in September 2012, reports came quickly splattering in about possible oil and dust issues which culminated in the seminal report by Roger Cicala of Lensrentals in October 2012.
Nikon issued their 1st service advisory in February 2013 about a possible dust issue with the D600. They offered to inspect and clean the sensor, if necessary.
Now one year and two class-action lawsuits later, Nikon issue a 2nd service advisory about a free inspection and shutter replacement?
And you ask why Nikon have lost goodwill with many of their faithful customers...
yeah.. and it sure does not help to be the worst performer in the nikkei 2013.
small updates to the D4s, the crappy D600, worst underperformer in the nikkei. nikon is not doing well.
WAIT WAIT..... did nikon did not say all the time there is NO ISSUE.... only normal dust collection.
Lucas_: I'll never be convinced by a 16MP FF sensor.
looking at you baby images i can see why....
Henry M. Hertz: the question is... does nikons claim hold up that ISO 1600 on this camera looks like ISO 800 on the D4.
i have not seen sample images yet.and is it JPG or RAW they speak about?
im not really interested in a better JPG noise reduction.i shoot only RAW.
and when it is so good.. why only a nativ ISO of 25600?
the question is... does nikons claim hold up that ISO 1600 on this camera looks like ISO 800 on the D4.