KWEnz

KWEnz

Lives in New Zealand (Aotearoa) Auckland, New Zealand (Aotearoa)
Works as a Contracts Manager
Joined on Jun 9, 2009
About me:

Canon 7D with Meike battery grip

Canon 10-22mm + 24-105mm + 70-200mm f4 IS +
100mm f2.8 macro
Canon 1.4x II teleconverter, Kenko 2x teleconverter

Canon TC-80N3 timer remote controller

Manfrotto 055XProB tripod with Manfrotto 410 geared head

Lowepro Flipside 400 AW backpack
Lowepro Nova 5 AW bag

Photoshop CS5
Lightroom 4.4
Portrait Professional Studio 64
Zerene Stacker
Stackshot Extended macro rail

Comments

Total: 8, showing: 1 – 8
In reply to:

MisterPootieCat: Why would Canon offer such an improved version of DPP and limit it to just 4 pro camera bodies? I'm hoping the list of supported cameras will grow over time, it took a couple years for the DLO modules (lens correction) to be released for the earlier versions of DPP.

MisterPootieCat, where did you see that a new version of DPP 3 will be released soon? Are you sure it is not EOS Utility 3.0 that was announced at the same time as DPP 4.0?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 11:49 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: So, Canon supports a whole 4 of their own cameras, while Adobe supports around 300 cameras from many manufacturers. Heck, Canon isn't even supporting half of their current models!

I've tried using DPP 4.0 with my Canon 7D RAW files and it doesn't work. Same for EOS Utility 3.0 when trying to operate the 7D - it doesn't work, but reverts back to EOS Utility 2.0. Matthew (m at the w), it seems you are wrong and the previous posters are correct.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 01:26 UTC
In reply to:

Jan Luursema: If only they would make DPP faster. I bought a new computer just to make DPP work faster, but it's still almost as slow to use as on my old PC! Only the batch processing is faster, but making edits in the program is annoyingly slow.
Maybe they need to hire someone from Adobe.

To save anyone the trouble of installing DPP 4.0 and/or EOS Utility 3.0 without one of the specified cameras (Canon EOS-1D X, EOS 1-D C, EOS 5D Mark III or EOS 6D) I can confirm that neither program will work. Using a 5D Mk III serial number I found on the internet, I downloaded both programs and tried using them with my 7D. Images couldn't be shown bigger than thumbnail size in DPP 4.0 and were unable to be edited. EOS 3.0 wouldn't open, but EOS 2.0 did. Here's hoping Canon widens the range of cameras that can use these updated programs.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 10:04 UTC
On Battle of the titans: Top ball heads tested article (268 comments in total)
In reply to:

rednec: Manfrotto head should have been included. They are GOLD standart and widely used. This refers about the quality of the reviewer....

I don't agree that they are the gold standard, but they make good stuff and are pretty good value. I have a Manfrotto 410 Junior geared head and *love* it. I found with ball heads that I could never get them to stay in the same place after tightening them (during macro photography) but not so with the Manfrotto 410. It has coarse and fine adjustments in 3 directions and stays where it is set - not like the Manfrotto 486 & 496 ballheads that I used to own.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 13, 2014 at 22:57 UTC
On Vanguard Abeo Pro Tripod Kit article (14 comments in total)

"However, the ABEO Pro 283CT majorly one-ups the Manfrotto 190 series with the ability to move the center column vertically from 0 - 180º angles."

Not correct - the Manfrotto can also invert the centre column upside down. This is done by pulling it fully out of its holding "sleeve" and reinserting it upside down. It is not an all-in-one movement, but it nevertheless can be easily done.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 5, 2014 at 23:43 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
On Leica announces X Vario zoom compact with APS-C sensor article (757 comments in total)
In reply to:

vroger1: This my third or 4th post on this subject,-hopefully the last... I am that indignant. - In sum...this digicam insults us. That's all... it's an insult to those of us (like me) who own Leicas from IIIc to M6, braces of lenses, and followed up with Digilux- and D-Lux all because we felt that the results were worth it. To produce a piece of c**p like this with NO redeeming qualities for a serious photography is, solely produced for the money spent for the cachet (see the case with the cutout for the logo)- I repeat is nothing short of a gross insult. How dare they?

That's nothing that a bit of black electrical tape or black paint can't fix. Which leads me to a good idea - I may block out the Canon name on my 7D and paint a red dot on it and pretend it's a Leica. I would then get the adulation but without the cost.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 13, 2013 at 01:22 UTC
In reply to:

Bart Hickman: $20/month for Photoshop? That's much more than double the current cost with upgrades. The competition must be jumping for joy at this huge market opening Adobe is handing them. CS6 will certainly be the last version of Photoshop I buy.

Adobe just made is much much easier for other companies (and new startups) to compete with them. What InDesign did to QuarkXPress is what some other good software will do to Photoshop. There are many talented developers round the world that will relish the opportunity to step into Photoshop's shoes.

Direct link | Posted on May 6, 2013 at 20:27 UTC
In reply to:

h2k: QUOTE:
"...the most interesting thing about these launches is the fact that Canon feels the need to update various full-frame lenses, almost as if something likely to test the quality of its existing versions was in the offing."
---
Cute wording.

Agreed, I am sure dpreview knows something that we don't hence their "coded" message. They are possibly even writing their hands-on preview of the 5D Mk III right now.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2012 at 09:54 UTC
Total: 8, showing: 1 – 8