Paphios: 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.
That's correct - Lightroom will still have the perpetual license.
winkalman: Aperture here I come...
Lightroom will still have a perpetual license.
Lee Jay: Still waiting to see my first good street photography image.
"There are some of Trent Parke's images that I do really enjoy:"
These pictures are horrendous. I'd delete them in-camera.
And, no, I've never seen an HCB street shot that was any good. He has a couple of non-street shots that are okay.
Is there something about "street photography" that requires everything to be out-of-focus, motion blurred, black-and-white, clipped or crushed, tilted, and/or badly framed?
Still waiting to see my first good street photography image.
Revimaru: This IS a game changer. Extremely good news for people like me who have hard time justifying the cost of replacing their crop body with a FF just to get better low light performance
I have a crop sensor camera Canon 40D and my main problem is the lack of choices for a fast wide-normal zoom lens for my needs in astrophotography and shooting band gigs in small bars. Right now I am almost done saving up for Canon 6D body and a 24-70 2.8. Well my plan changed with this announcement. I'll probably be getting a 7D which offers BETTER features than the 6D and wait for this lens.
I mean really look at this:6D + 24-70mm 2.8 = ~$37007D + 18-35mm 2.8 = ~$2800
THAT'S $900 WORTH OF BEER FELLAS!!!!
And oh, you could get camera accessories instead too :)
24-70 is vastly superior in range to 29-57. I'd need at least one wider f/1.8 zoom on the 7D to make up for it.
Without 24mm-equivalent, a normal zoom is a non-starter for me. 15mm or bust!
madeinlisboa: 5 new features and a whole lot of dough from customers. Nice one Adobe!Still using CaptureNX + ColorEfex....
Like I said, more than a hundred new features:
There are more than a hundred new features.
digitant: I am still using LR3 on a Mac (2012 MBA/13/8/512). Trying out LR5b I notice two things:
* the size of the app: it has grown from 110MB to 1.1GB !* it still is no true full screen app on Mac OS X 10.8, despite what Adobe says.
Surely these are not show stoppers, but they matter to me.
The size is mostly for templates and profiles. The basic application isn't anywhere near that large.
gl2k: Absolutely no reason to upgrade from 4 to 5. Distortion control is nice but not enough.
Just the aspect ratio overlay, the crop while maintaining center (those will save me hours and hours) and the spot healing would be enough for me. Add in radial gradients and all the little stuff, and this one is a much bigger upgrade for me than LR3 -> LR4 was.
qianp2k: Hope it can handle Canon CR2 files better in reducing banding in lifting shadows. Canon DPP hands in this area better than LR4 but DPP is very limited.
DPP doesn't handle it at all, it just cranks up the noise reduction by default. You can do the same in LR if you want, but it's on Canon to start making better sensors.
JavaJones: FFS Adobe, what a paltry update. I really hope this is not the complete feature list of the final.
That being said, I do appreciate having early beta access for free, so thanks for that! Just please add face recognition, for god's sake.
"FFS Adobe, what a paltry update."
7 pages of new features?
socalcarlos: What I really want to see in Lightroom is a liquify filter, a kind of Alien skin bokeh or on one focal point filter, off center multiple vigneting and a real photoshop like spot healing tool.This 5 version of Lightroom is supposed to have the off center multiple vigneting and a better healing tool, there's still 3 more tools to make it perfect.
Liquify? Yuck. Alien skin? Yuck. I don't know what focal point is.
Off-center vignetting is in LR 5. The spot healing tool is as well.
bills_pix: I wonder if it will be subscription only. Adobe is not making near enough money off it at $99 to keep them happy. Prepare for the worst with Adobe.
You have in the past. The LR4 upgrade would work on LR 1 through 3.
smallcams: I am so close to quitting Adobe.
Lightroom 4 upgrade was (is) $69. Too expensive?
thx1138: IMO LR4 does not extract as fine detail as LR3 did. Swithcing betwen 2010 and 2012 process I see a definite loss of very fine detail. I hope LR5 can address their demosaicing and match C1 7 for example. Also they need to allow for sharpening radius less than 0.5 pixels. Additionally why can't they add selections for making masks rather than having to paint over an object and keep changing brush radius for fiddly edges.
LR5 has the same process version as LR4 (PV2012).
Sharpening radius in LR when set to 1 is a lot like 0.5 set in unsharp mask. They are different algorithms.
cuol: I still hate the lightroom color rendering. Why does every other converter look better to me using either Canon or Nikon files? The tools are great, but something about the look sucks.
In that case, maybe you like high-contrast high-saturation colors that are the defaults from the camera manufacturers. You can set presets or defaults like that if you want in Lightroom to make that more of the starting point.
"Why does every other converter look better to me using either Canon or Nikon files?"
Miscalibrated monitor? I would say the look of Canon's Standard was best described by Petteri as "Retina Peel".
ArcaSwiss: Did they get rid of (or have an option to turn off) the cataloging system ?
The cataloging system is the heart of Lightroom, and likely will never go away. The version of Lightroom that doesn't have the Catalog is the Camera Raw plugin for Photoshop.