Neodp: Great new software. Now a word about non-destructive.
Why is this a selling point? Current (non)reality mean it is and that's great for this new software. But what is the deal with "non-destructive".
I spent years with Lightroom (Lr) and it's claim to fame was "non-destructive" edits. This is really crap and snake oil (mostly). Editors do this with something like the Lr "catalogs". We bought this because a lot of folks start off with JPEG only and want to edit them. It is what it is; but as you know every time you save a compressed JPEG it then degrades. EVEN if you only shoot JPEG then are you afraid of accidentally saving over it or what? Aren't they backed up anyway?
Also, the idea is to have tens of sprawling version of the one original file. Such a B&W and the one with a chickens head on a squirrel; that took you a week to get right. Thus protecting the base mother file. Else what makes the most sense is one highly edited picture from which many other rendition are made....
Non-destructive is merely a term that means the original file (RAW, jpeg, etc) remains unaltered. It's a selling point because you do not need to remember to do a "save as" before you go and edit each image and risk making irreparable changes to your original file.
Your last paragraph makes little sense. The whole idea is to have multiple versions and "looks" of the same base image. How can this be done from ONE highly edited image? You can't just turn a nicely edited color image into a nice B&W image simply by clicking the B&W button. I spend as much time (if not more) working on a B&W image than I do a color one.
Aroart: Very cool.. someone give me a call when you can do this in video than I'll be realy impressed.. Non the less nice to see co trying out new ideas. ..I can see a great use for this in sports and action photography..
"Burst images in 4K resolution (3840 x 2160 pixels) are shot at 30 fps while detecting up to 49 areas of a frame for focus points at different depths of field."
I doubt this technique will work for sports/action, where one second is an eternity. You notice that all the examples they showed were stationary subjects. The camera needs one second to capture a series of bracketed of shots as dr. noise mentioned in his post. ^
Excellent tips. I'm going to share this with my camera club.
RichRMA: It's a tiny smart phone sensor so who cares how it performs? It was like BSI sensors, that took forever to reach a decent size. Come back in five years.
@RichRMA I'm sure secretaries said the same thing about typewriters when word processors came about.
You do realize we're probably on the cusp of being able to wear a device like Google Glass and just "think" about taking a picture and it will snap one. Not that I use one on a regular basis, but the quality of the cell phone camera keeps improving each year. It's only a matter of time.
PascallacsaP: Just made a full switch from Aperture to Lightroom 6, have more or less mastered the not so intuitive user interface of LR, and now this... Doesn't feel good. Glad I'm not an early adopter. Will definitely stay with 6.1 for the time being. And will definitely look around for sensible alternatives again...
I was curious and downloaded the C1 trial version this past weekend. I consider myself fairly savvy with software, but I didn't find the C1 interface very intuitive. To my eyes I didn't notice any discernible difference over LR using the same RAW file.
R Stacy: Coming from PS CS5 (CS3 before that) LR always seemed a complex mess to work with and not easy to develop (pun intended) a reasonable work flow.
PS or ACR? ACR is not too complex. PS on the other hand can be quite intimidating to the average photographer.
I have had another mini-tripod for 2.5 years now and can recommend it. A bit more functionality at a lesser price. I especially like the clamp feature. I have hung my Canon 600D and 70-300 on it.
WACONimages: Where is the haze removal function in my bought/payed copy of LR6???
That was a huge failure Adobe to leave that out and only available for the monthly subscribers. No way I ever gonna do that. I didn't find/read any documentation that the Haze Removal function weren't in the full payed single copies of LR6
@HowaboutRAWI do almost all of my editing in LR4. It's way more than just an image organizational program. Plug-ins from Nik and OneOn take it to another level as well. I'm rarely in PS6 except for special functions.
Some nice images Jeff. One suggestion for shooting flowers. Would one be able to achieve some semblance of bokeh using this kit by backing up a bit and zooming in more? When you were at 7.9mm (P1000173.acr.jpg) and 11.9mm (P1000190.acr.jpg) not too much separation. You started to get a bit more when you backed off to 24.8mm (P1000367.JPG) although the background was further away from the subject. I think you really started to see some potential at 92.7mm (P1000408.JPG) though. I would try around 150-200mm if space permits.
I would frequently use my Canon 70-300mm IS at 200-300mm on a crop sensor Canon to achieve maximum bokeh effect. Of course distance from background plays a role, but you'd be surprised at what nice effect you can achieve by zooming vs. closeup.
This has some interesting features and good space. The one thing that jumps out at me though is the size and material of the neck strap for the front flap. Being that thin, it will dig into your neck. You will be supporting more weight than just the front flap so the forecast calls for pain I think.
I still love my LowePro Slingshot 200, which is great for day outings. But the Backlight would definitely carry more gear and be suited for weekends or extended travel I think. Especially with the tripod carry feature that the Slingshot lacks.
Jabs767: Great shot with a very minor point.
Why is it that a lot of non-aviation specialist photographers shoot prop-driven aircraft at too high shutter speed thereby freezing that beautiful blur of a prop with a contrasting coloured tip that would otherwise describe a beautiful coloured arc?
Having a frozen prop detracts from what otherwise would have been a FANTASTIC shot. Sorry!
Moose Peterson is one of the preeminent American aviation photographers. Exif data on a number of his images with propellers in motion show a SS of somewhere between 1/50 and 1/100. Planes are tack sharp front to back.
travelshots_dpr: That means with the next camera generation my time with ACR and Photoshop will be over, at least with RAW processing. I won't enter the cloud. I have already bought and installed Capture One 8 Pro; now it is time to practice with C1 to be familiar with it when the comfortable RAW support for my CS6 ends.
C1 already has a subscription model in place. How long do you think it will be until they follow in Adobe's footsteps? I'm guessing just around the time you are comfortable using the program.
munro harrap: The last time I tried this off-cloud trial of Photoshop it refused to work, saying I had already had it and needed to buy. I shall now attempt again, will let you know if it works... Do hope I dont have to be online all the time I'm working...Dont want my stuff getting to Adobe for free!! Does anyone?
There are things I fail in. I do not understand updates. Surely a competent designer is able to write down what we need globally, all of it, and then simply write all those needs and all those adjustments into Photoshop, or Windows, or Apple OS, or a Nikon, Canon, Pentax or Sony camera? Surely.
I agree there are technological advances in hardware, but in software? So far the only reason , me the old PJ has for even wanting Photoshop over Lightroom is they refuse to allow LR to sharpen at 0.2 pixels, forcing us to use 0.5 at least. Not an update then at all, a commercial tyranny.
munro. I do not like the subscription model any more than you do, however your post has a few flaws.1) It is already well documented that you do NOT need to be online 24/7 in order to use CC. It will periodically ping the Adobe server to make sure your account is up to date though.2) You do not understand updates? The world revolves around updates. Things are always being improved upon. 3) Software updates are probably more prevalent/important than hardware upgrades these days. Anything digital is essentially useless without software. One small example is how Google were able to significantly improve the image quality coming from the Nexus 5 camera through a software upgrade.
Mark Rosen: Just puchased standalone LR6. No haze elimination. Please bring this to LR6!
@rockclimber87 LR6 was just very recently released. You don't think this feature was well in the works before it's release? Is it a big, must have feature? No. Adobe are just using it as a tiny stick to whack those who refuse to adopt their cloud subscription. This type of behavior actually drives me further away as a potential subscriber.
Barend: I want to buy software and install it on my computer. No cloud for me, NSA knows allready enough :-))If LR is not supported anymore I go find an alternative.
@ PKB. Maybe I am mistaken but I have read elsewhere that the new features (such as Dehaze) are NOT available in the newly released perpetual version of LR6.
Bill Bentley: I look to the skies for low light sensor evaluation. For me, it appears ISO1250 is the maximum without needing to employ noise reduction in PP. I can live with that. For me, I'm usually on a tripod and ISO100 in those conditions anyway.
Absolutely! And trail mix too. :-)
Seriously though. To shoot the blue hour, you are usually anywhere from 2-45 seconds, so a tripod is essential.
I look to the skies for low light sensor evaluation. For me, it appears ISO1250 is the maximum without needing to employ noise reduction in PP. I can live with that. For me, I'm usually on a tripod and ISO100 in those conditions anyway.
Tilted Plane: I admire dpreview overall, but doesn't this seem small potatoes compared to the really interesting new lenses out there (some fast wide zooms, some terrific fast primes, etc.)? I mean, you complain that you don't have the resources to get reviews done faster, but now you have time to check out a f/1.8 50mm? Hmmm. Am I alone on this?
@Photomonkey I think the two cat images in the gallery go to show that cat loving FB'ers can actually step their game up with this lens. Look at those eyes. Those eyes! ;-)
Dave Oddie: I'm not into phones that much a photographic tool just using my Nexus 5 when I have forgotten the camera.
The one thing that would tempt me to charge my phone is one with a higher capacity battery. My phone is fine for day to day use when I am in work where I can plug it into the laptop to charge but i'ts not much use if I can't find a power source at some point if I have been using GPS etc.
So whenever I see a phone with a larger battery that grabs my attention. The trouble is they all seen to be phablet sized.
Why can't manufacturers put a top spec phone together that isn't a phablet more often?
It's the battery technology limitations at the moment. Some new fast charging technology lets you get to about 75%+ charge in about 10-15 mins now. But I'm sure that will affect the life of the battery. But if the phone allows for battery removal, and the batteries are not too expensive, then this may be the way of the future. Kind of like the Tesla car battery swapping stations.
Wow. Such big music for a macro solution.