I can't see a mention of space limits anywhere. How many GB's does this include? Unlimited image hosting?
watson076: Over the last few years manufacturers have really lost touch with what photographers love, but I believe Fuji really hit the reset button. 40-50 mp this and that, 4k video, blah blah blah - who the f**k cares ? What I want is a true photographic experience (and I speak for many friends of mine who feel the same way). Fuji concentrates on what true photographers want, not what focus groups tell them to manufacture. Thank god someone is listening.
@watson076, sandy b did not miss your point or put a spin on it. And your lengthy, defensive reply was childish.
You want a camera you can "connect" with? Good photographers can make good images with $25 instant cameras. Of course ergonomics are important too, but that is not what this discussion was about.
halfwaythere: The penultimate shot, the one with the dog, is quite horrendous image quality wise: very noisy to the point of asking myself is this was shot at ISO 3200 or higher and the CA in the tree is quite "spectacular".
I see the appeal of a camera like this but I don't understand the hype.
@ Pandimonium. You haven't been here that long, have you? ;-)
Horshack: I was going to comment on how the USA has influenced Barney's speech when I saw 'reckon' in the second sentence. But after a quick google search I learned the word is common in British English, which is surprising considering it's only common here in the south. Interesting how certain words have uncommon bedfellows.
I was alarmed at the use of the word "gotten". My grade 12 English teacher (a wonderful 65+ year old English gentleman with a waxed handlebar mustache and thick black rimmed glasses) always reminded us that gotten is rotten. :-)
kenneth_manila: These gloves look similar to the Freehands Thinsulate Gloves I bought from B&H when I was in NYC 4 years ago.
I won't keep SD cards in my gloves, and I won't use a microfiber strip integrated into gloves to clean my lenses, so I don't see the advantage of these gloves over the Freehands version.
BTW, the Freehands version was around US$35.
Freehands has the SD pocket now and also improved their design (per customer feedback) to include a liner for the "exposed" thumb and forefinger. $39 USD.
falconeyes: These gloves have a severe design flaw ...
... they don't second-act as flash diffuser when drawn over. Was it this hard to find a transparent material?
Right glove for daylight, left one for tungsten (comes in yellowish color).
Ha, and would be just in time for spring flower macros too. ;-)
Ken Takes Photos: I feel bad for the developers of this product reading these comments. :-(
I don't think they care though. ;-)
7,549 backers$655,250 pledged of $50,000 goal7 days to go
whyamihere: For those who complain about the lack of Android support, I can only respond by reminding people how utterly fractured the OS really is:
Samsung produces dozens of Android devices running different versions of Android that are forked by varying TouchWiz modifications. Lumu, being a small company, does not have the resources to test what would be hundreds of combinations of software and hardware to ensure compatibility.
And that's just one manufacturer.
It probably make sense for Lumu to put their efforts into a platform that only has a handful of devices, where most users tend to use the latest version of the OS, and which can be more-easily tested for QA. Testing the latest stock version of Android on a few ubiquitous devices is simply not representative of the majority, and they'd likely not want to have bad press because their device failed to work with your Samsung Galaxy Rectangle Note S6+ Whatever.
Very simple solution then. Only focus on making the device compatible with the very best Android camera devices. LG4, Samsung S6, Sony Experia, etc. There are really only about 6 or so at the present time. These are the people who would buy this, not the person with the $50 Moto E or whatever.
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.