Spectro: Every time you update Lightroom it is redownloading 872mb. why can't they just do like window little update for just the newer codec.
"Only a measling 83mb to download Camera RAW update for Photoshop CC. lol! Beats Lightroom anydays."
Which has what to do with what, exactly? I'm missing your point here...
awoz: #11 Those lenses in the bag (slide #1) should have a lens cap.
budi0251: let's start with the first and foremost important item you MUST have in your "camera" bag; the "CAMERA" itself, it's a camera bag for pete's sake.
"What's in your camera bag? A camera (hopefully) and maybe a lens or two, but that's probably not everything that you need."
It's on the leader page, Pete.
Denver Wedding Photographers: Seriously funny article.
My only question for the author would be, is there anything in that list that would not be obvious to a photographer, pro or otherwise?
Some folks here really need to get over themselves. Stop assuming that every article is written for *you*. There are a great many people reading this who would benefit from it. Three years ago when I started out, I didn't have most of this stuff in my bag. I do now, and use most of it on a regular basis. For anyone starting out, this list could be invaluable.
AbrasiveReducer: Funny how complexity builds on complexity. You need a phone that can display your instruction manuals because feature creep has made it impossible to memorize everything in your camera's 350 page instruction manual.
Fair enough, but how about an article on the 10 things a photographer should never bring with them. I'll start. (1) A bag that could only be a camera bag (2) a camera strap that says NIKON or CANON in 2 inch high letters, (3) a 70-200/2.8 lens that's so heavy you can't walk, (4) a card or tag with your home address, (5) lens cleaners that prevent "fogging", (6) telextenders greater than 2X, (7) off-brand memory cards, (8) tripods & quick releases that use plastic at key points....
The advice about the business card is good. I've had to show mine to everyone from private security to federal marshals.
"(3) a 70-200/2.8 lens that's so heavy you can't walk"
Exaggerate much? How does a 1.5KG weight constitute immobility? Where is the logic in suggesting people *shouldn't* carry what is arguably the most capable, versatile lens ever created?
Robert Schambach: Sorry but a really useless article.
Robert, how, exactly is this a "useless" article? Seriously, don't just go lazily chucking such a comment out there, explain what you mean.
pictureAngst: Thank you, a really useful article
It is, and gave me a smug moment when I realised I already have everything listed in my bag, bar the small flash. :)
DotCom Editor: I'm excited to learn from this piece that I need neither camera nor lenses in my camera bag. It really lightens the load.
DotCom Editor, you're being ridiculous.
theoschela: anyone find the 5.2 Final's bug fix list?
"The bug with exports less that 1/3 size has been fixed. Major joy."
LR5 is now on my buy-list. :) That bug made it a major no-no before now.
Henry M. Hertz: from adobe:
■Images exported at less than 1/3 of their original size may not retain Output Sharpening and Noise Reduction settings.
this is an ugly bug. so resizing for web will not work for many.
i hope adobe will offer a fast bugfix for this.or people have to wait until 5.1 is released in october or so to get a working LR.
Does this bug exist in 4.x?
RawDogg: I can't vote. I haven't used any that are listed. I feel as if you need to have used at least 2 of the listed cameras to give an honest vote, otherwise you're just voting for your favorite brand name.
Agreed, there should be a no-vote / see results option.
Robert Judelson: The Cannon 5D Mark 3 should win the Worst camera award
Yeah, convincing argument there...
Soo Yee Seong: Now people sell shortcut keys for money???This is crazy...
Lightroom & Photoshop are "mediocre" software?
The girl in the car seems to be reacting to the price. I concur. One way to make absolutely certain that people pirate your software... take the p*** with the price.
Apewithacamera: Just imagine how hot that lens will get outdoors under the sun. Yeeeouch!
marike6 : "And do you think painting metal white really makes a significant difference?"
Seriously? Are you really asking this question? It's basic physics. Want to know how the heat turbulence varies between the two without placing sensors inside a lens? Sit inside a black car with the windows up and no aircon for "X" amount of time in direct sunlight, then do the same in a white car. There's your answer.
Barney Britton: To everyone who thinks its appropriate to mindlessly troll, have some respect. If you don't have anything constructive to say, don't say anything. It's appalling how rude some of the comments are on this page.
HowaboutRAW : "So there are big image quality problems"
What problems? Please, do elaborate, and tell us how you've come to this conclusion from that very limited test / review.
CameraLabTester: The question every post here should be answering is:
"Will you buy this?"
Might've been a good, pocketable backup cam to pop into my bag, allowing the use of my current lenses, but at that price??? No chance.
nicolaiecostel: Knowing Canon, I'm surprised that they don't charge for it. Also, this could mean that they have absolutely no new sensor ready in the near future, other than the 18MP (figures..), so they cannot release a succesor to the 7D (650D to 600D, anyone) because that would mean releasing the same camera, with the changes from this firmware. They are threading water for the moment, I'm curios what will be the answer to the 24 MP sony sensor already seen in sony and nikon .
"They'd better do the important improvements."
Or what? You'll skweam and skweam and skweam?
Jen Yates: When Canon doesn't upgrade the firmware a bunch of little forum kids scream, wail and bang at the bars of their cot.
When Canon does upgrade the firmware a bunch of little forum kids scream, wail and bang at the bars of their cot.
When a bunch of forum kids scream, wail etc you'll get another bunch of forum kids screaming and wailing about the first bunch of screaming, wailing kids.
And so it goes on... and on... and on...
Nothing ever really changes.
Indeed. We'd better hope that camera MFRs don't read these comment threads, or they'll be thinking (quite rightly), "Why the hell do we bother?".
MrScary: What is the point in all this useless updates. Who on earth wants that high iso.all you'll get is NOISE & more NOISE, Pointless. We need LESS noise.In Camera RAW image editing. Do we not waste enough time already when Chimping? Who the heck wants to do RAW editing in camera..NUTS!GPS--Ah Ah, making it easier for D.Cameron and Buddies to track us...:)
"What is the point in all this useless updates. Who on earth wants that high iso.all you'll get is NOISE & more NOISE, Pointless. We need LESS noise."
Reading comprehension not your strong point then? The update enables the user to LIMIT the auto-ISO range, not extend the ceiling point.