Rob: Suddenly, I'm no longer that excited about the upcoming 5D Mark IV update. If the a7R II fulfills all of its promises and 5D Mark IV doesn't include the features I really want, there's a chance I'll be upgrading to the a7R II from my 5D Mark III. Will have to wait and see just how good the PDAF on the a7R II is for subject tracking during AF (for stills and video).
Count me in. On paper lots of reasons to get this caerma. Imagine the 135 zeiss in the dark with image stabilisation! Will of course need to see the reviews proper and will still wait to see the Canon 5DIV (but only if it comes out this year). I hope it will exceed expectations (=match my needs... :-)) Or else my next DSLR will not be a Canon.
Parry Johnson: I bought a Fuji S2 in 2002 for over $3000, sold it to a friend in 2006 for $400, and recently sold it again as part of his estate for $79. Resale value should not be a concern in this industry. Usefulness value should. I never expect to get any money back from my camera equipment, but expect it to pay for itself (and then some!) through actual paying clients or through the pure pleasure of the fun of photography.
So, for those well-heeled amateurs, go for it! For those not-so-well-heeled professionals and professional-wannabees-who-have-another-actual-full-time-job like me, euh... maybe, but only if it's really going to "pay off."
@Parry Johnson for some years now I have buying/selling lenses - widening my photographic opportunities while not getting stuck with too much hardware.
So far total resale value has exceeded my total purchase costs.
I have certainly been on the lucky side of Canon's rising lens prices and I also sold a couple of "bundled" lenses which were practically give-aways compared to the cost of the item I actually wanted.
So for me lenses have been a better "investment" - even if it has been more luck than anything else.
Interesting. But I think 99% of all DSLR photographers would get even better color correction if they could be bothered to set the camera color temp correctly. No - you can't just rely on doing it in post because you shoot RAW - as you are likely to introduce tonality shifts (not sure about the English term here).
I think the like/dislike function can be useful. I have seen it work well on another very large forum were feelings often run high - however with a very important twist.
In stead of showing number of likes/dislikes it only shows the "sum" of likes/dislikes. I'm not sure why but it seems to work better in practice than the like/dislike flaming that some times goes on forums. Youtube being a prime example here.
I just realised that there is also a consideration "hiding" entries with a certain number of dislikes - please, no more censorship than we have already...
maiaibing: Boycot? Against what?
Its their Rock show - they set the rules. If you and others do not want to comply, just stay away. Musicians and other live artists are struggling hard to make their ends meet and to protect themselves from being ripped off in this digital age.
Its like newpapers not wanting to pay for interviews. They end up not having any interviews with rock or film stars. Its not a big deal its just a choice they make. Make your choice and be at peace with your fellow artists.
@JDThomas did you read my post? "Its like newpapers not wanting to pay for interviews". However, lots of magazines do. Some TV-shows do. Lots of people in showbusiness and other artits only give interviews if you pay them.
Boycot? Against what?
Lou Gonzalez: Some people here are complaining about slowness. I had performance issues with LR4 as well. I went digging around for information and Adobe has released an article detailing all of the things you can do to optimize performance. Check it out here: http://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/optimize-performance-lightroom.html
I was already doing much of this, but the biggest thing that helped me was creating 1:1 previews on import. It takes a while but once they are done LR4 moves much quicker. Give it a try.
Also read these tips and also find that it helps making 1:1 previews from the start. A fast machine will do it at almost the same speed as reduced sized previews.
Slobodan Blagojevic: The real question is why would I want to post larger? To make it more attractive for thieves to still it and/or print it?
@Stig Nygaard I am also unhappy with the March 1 curfew. However, its a fact that flickr counts photos in the hundreds and hundreds og millions which surely was important for the decision. The problem is that a lot of people use flickr for free...
What I hope is that flickr remembers that it also has PAYING customers - whom they should not disappoint in this way. Clearly, it was more important for flickr to not upset its large non-unpaying crowd than doing the right thing towards its customers.
I'm not renewing my subscription if this does not change before next renewal is up.
Jan2009: Excellent composition... was this in Philippines as per the title suggest.
Thank you - and yes it was!
40% of everyone in Copenhagen rides their bike to school or work - every day. Together they bike more than 1.000.000 km a day.
Kim Letkeman: "Fair Use" : Examples of fair use include commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship.
One wonders exactly which of those uses the lawyer was claiming that her video-for-money might have been classified under ... what a stretch :-)
Which is why that argument was dismissed by the court back in July...
michi098: The whole concept sounds pretty neat. I would be willing to try one. However, the fact that I can't share my pictures except by going through their website is an absolute no-go. I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that way?
Agree. The limitations in hosting the pictures is very likely a killer for the tech. Facebook is fine for some - but its not a place photogs go to upload their pictures or to show them off. I have around 100.000 pictures on the web - and maybe 100 of these are hosted or have been uploaded to Facebook. Meanwhile I have some blog-sized pictures at flickr. Just including a photo sharing site such as flickr could already make the tech interesting for a lot more people that have a main interest in photography. Facebook is not a place for them...
Sound disbelief can be a very good thing. Already. I have this strong gut feeling that I will not upgrade to the next edition of PS just to get their new magic anti-blur technology...
Very Danish city scenery (though typically smaller cities). Could see it was from Denmark - even as a thumb nail. Nice pic.
AllOtherNamesTaken: Some of you are hilarious. I'm not aware of a single lens Sigma makes that costs more than the Nikon/Canon direct equivalent. Every sigma lens is 2/3 of the Sigma MSRP at announcement time. Not sure why everyone is getting so excited over the MSRP. Clearly it will be around $800.
"I'm not aware of a single lens Sigma makes that costs more than the Nikon/Canon direct equivalent."
Sigma 85mm f/1.4 is more expensive than the Canon f/1.8, the 50mm f/1.4 is more expensive than the Canon 50 f/1.4 and the Sigma 15mm fish is more expensive than the Canon version (in most countries). Maybe there are more that I just don't know of.
Had quite a difficult time deciding which to post. Glad you liked the one i picked. Full series is here:
Thank you for your kind comments. I tried my best to get the same kind of look & feel and I'm glad that it at least came close!
Thank you for your comment!
Thank you! (nt)