Studor13: Wonder when they will fix the bug that stops you from printing anything bigger than A4 on an Epson 3880.
Yes, I know I can get around it by printing via Photoshop but I really shouldn't have to.
Like I said, if you are printing via direct USB you don't (seem to) have this problem. But my printer is not in the same room as my Mac and I print via my local network.
Unless Scott Kelby is lecturing and printing "superlarge" with the printer connect to a network, maybe you should just be quiet. You don't have this printer, right?
I am not the only person on the planet with this problem.
Do a Google and you will see, OK?
I had been able to print A3 in LR via USB but not since I upgraded to the latest OS X.
Even in Photoshop I've had a lot of problems when trying to print longer than A2.
I believe this problem is only for Mac users and only if you try to print via a network.
Some people are very unhappy about this but it would seem that not too many pepole actually print bigger than A4 or they just print directly from their Macs.
Wonder when they will fix the bug that stops you from printing anything bigger than A4 on an Epson 3880.
keepreal: If you have a recent camera or lens, you might need the latest version of Camera Raw or the DNG Converter. Otherwise, it's about time more people were sensible and learned proper skills on less than the latest without falling prey to every new release of photo imaging software and indeed newer digital equipment.
Apart from professionals or serious amateurs who need to make prints ten feet wide, just learn to make the most of what you've got before you think of moving on.
I have a Nikon D300 and the lens I choose to use almost exclusively is the Sigma 12-24mm f4.5-5.6 EX DG. Neither is near the best you can get today but I am not interested in looking at my 59.4 cm prints with a magnifying glass. Without it they are perfectly sharp enough. Not only that, I use Photoshop CS2 without the latest bells and whistles and now have a lot of skill with it. I won it in a competition because of what I could do with Elements 2. I would not have been prepared to pay for it out of my own pocket.
One of the best thing that happened in LR 5 was the ability to erase parts of a graduated gradient.
No doubt you can do it in your CS2. But Lightroom is a such simpler beast then Photoshop and in many ways much better for photographers.
And now, not only is there a dehaze function, the latest update is now localized.
I don't know what it is that you are all bothered about but a lot of people - including me - are very happy about the updates.
aramgrg: And 15 years later when we have 70mp cameras in pockets with continuous full size recording and native is 4.5 mln, we're gonna smile reading pix 2015
@Vanitas PhotoYou obviously have no clue what you are talking about.
When you put a heavy lens in the portrait position - on a tripod, the chances are that it will drop slightly. If you are doing a long exposure the shot will become useless because of the movement. Good luck with putting say the 24-70mm f2.8 on a monopod and a 30 second exposure.
For some reason you have it in your head that everyone is shooting like you and only like you.
And as someone else has already pointed out, if you are working with only a prime lens say for street work then cropping makes things easier if you don't have time to get in closer.
Maybe you can give me a link to some of your "brilliant" compositions.
Here is some of my work:www.thelightinbohinj.com
Exactly. A superb 20mm lens becomes an even better 20-35mm!
I say 35mm because for web use you can crop a bit tighter and steal an extra 5mm.
@Vanitas PhotoThere are a number of good reasons to crop:1. Sometimes I prefer to shoot with the camera in the normal position rather than in portrait, especially if it is a heavy lens. A heavy lens can make the whole system unbalanced. By shooting wider than needed I get the composition right for the vertical. That is, whilst I don't need 14mm wide I may want the height of the 14mm composition.
2. Shooting wide can mean that I can have the camera leveled so that there is no parallax effect. For example, if I am shooting something with a tall structure behind and the camera is tilted, the structure looks like it it is leaning back. By having the camera level and shooting wide I can crop out elements that I don't need but have my structure looking level.
3. Shooting at 14mm means that I can have my exposures longer and still get stars to look "still". That is, I can get around 20-30 seconds of exposure before the stars trail. I can then crop for the composition I want.
I tried to connect my J5 to my Mac but gave up after about an hour.
The Mac connects to the J5 but the J5 says "Waiting for WiFi connection" and just hangs there.
When I click on Start Download I keep getting the message:
"airnef v1.00 - Wireless transfer of images/movies for Nikon cameras [GPL v3]Copyright (c) TestCams.com, App Launch Time: Fri Sep 18 09:12:06 2015
Connection established to 192.168.2.1:15740Camera Command Failed: MTP_OP_OpenSession, Error: MTP_RESP_InvalidParameter".
I think I will just stick to the cable from camera to Mac routine.
Nice idea though. A lot of hard work has gone into the project so best of luck for other cameras.
nicolaiecostel: Having used a friend's J1 and tried out another friend's V1,I must say that the 1 series from Nikon might me the most underrated camera system ever.
I bet most people dismissing the 1 system on this website have never even tried one.
Let me see if I've got this right.
So, you claim yourself to be a "photographer", but it took you two bodies, 4 lenses and a year to come to the conclusion that the IQ from the 1 series is basically that of a P&S?
I don't think you know anything about photography, let alone owning two 1-series cameras.
I have shot events using the V1+6.7-13mm for wides and D800+70-200mm for teles and I can tell you that none of my viewers complained about the IQ.
ttran88: No EVF, RX100M3 has the pop up evf. Couldn't they borrow that technology from Sony. It's hard to take Nikon's or Canon's mirrorless offerings seriously. The former comes out with this and the latter has a camera but doesn't want to sell it to everyone. Trying to not hurt your dslr sales? It doesn't get any more obvious than this.
The J series has never had nor will it ever have an EVF. If you are looking for an EVF try the V series.
Studor13: These "tests" make me laugh.
Try doing this regularly over an entire European winter nights:Leave the lenses on a tripod and shoot 1 to 2 hour long exposures. Make sure you have a few days where you are certain to get some serious condensation coming down onto the lenses.
After 3 winters my 14-24 is still going strong without any problems. I also have the 16-35mm f4 but I don't dare risk this lens because I am fairly certain that it would die a very sudden death.
There is far more to a lens than some apparent sharpness in the corners when viewed at 100% on a D810!
And BTW, 1mm is not insignificant on an extreme wide angled lens.
The problem I have is that people will jump up and down and say "Oh look the Tamron is sharper but is $600 cheaper" without understanding that the $600 difference has very little to do with whatever perceived sharpness the Tamron may or may not have.
These lenses have to perform in tough conditions, yet we never ever see such comparisons.
BTW, no way the 16-35 is as good as the 14-24 @ 16mm until f11.
These "tests" make me laugh.
Timmbits: I can't beging to imagine what I would do with 50MP. what print sizes do you need to go in order to even make this interesting?
I have 20MP on my Samsung, and it's already large file sizes and plenty of resolution.
imho, we need larger photosites. BSI on all sensors. higher sensitivities. improved DR.
@VignesIf you DO need/want only 10MP with great sized pixels why not buy it? Well, it's because that option is no longer available. (ignoring old models, of course)
Let's say Nikon and Canon get into another round of pixel wars. We could have a 100MP FF within 5 years. Then you will have 50MP as the base model.
Do you know what is the lowest number of MP you can get from an entry level Nikon DX? Yes, it's 24MP. Does everybody want/need an entry level camera with that many pixels?
So, please stop with this "if you don't need argument".
I'm not at all saying people don't need 50MP. I'm sure there are at least two people on DPreview who actually need it.
But if I say I need only 10MP but with good sized pixels, who will listen to me? Just as there are people who "need" more MPs I'd bet there are people like me who want less MPs in return for better color rendition.
But I am wrong and you are right, right?
I have a D800 but recently bought a D600 because 36MP is just too many pixels for the overwhelming number of times that I shoot.
The number of big prints that I do is small and the number that actually sell at that size is even less. The most popular print sizes that sell are 30x45cm.
Some people want more pixels and that's fine. But the most important thing for me is the smoothness of colors in the highlights, and as is neither the D800 or D600 are that smooth. They are not even close to how my eyes see these highlights, so in print...
I'm no scientist but I am fairly sure that the larger the pixel size the more chances that the colors are going to be more accurate.
And this is why medium format cameras are so expensive. Big sensor = big pixels.
Canon now has 50MP on a relatively small sensor but people here think that all of a sudden they are going to compete with MF cameras.
I think that this is what Timmbits is on about. He is entitled to his opinions, you know.
batmatty: Maybe someday Nikon will release a camera that doesn't need to be serviced every few months. Wishful thinking for 2015!
How many Nikon cameras do you actually own?
I have a D800, D600, D300, D70, F100, F50 and even an FE2.
The only camera that I ever had for service was the D70. And that was to have some dust removed from the sensor before I knew how to do it myself.
That's not to say that some bodies don't need service but if you think that every Nikon camera needs a service every few months (your own words) you clearly are an idi0t.
phazelag: I really like this camera but a 1/4000th shutter on a $2300 body is joke. These games are idiotic in my opinion and a big reason why started looking away from CaNikon.
I have a D300, D600 and a D800. I bought the D600 after the D800 because of a number of things I needed it to do alongside the D800.
!/8000 or 1/4000 makes no differences to me. I could probably even set auto ISO so that my D600 drops down to ISO 50 automatically and then I would effectively have 1/8000.
There are quite a number of things that make the D800 more 'pro' than the D600. The 1/4000th shutter speed "artificial feature" that you keep going on about is not one of them.
Do you have either the D750 or the D810 to actually backup what you are talking about?
You do realize that you can dial in ISO 50 which effectively gives you 1/8000, right?
And if you slap on a CPL at ISO 100 you get almost 1/160000.
Sometimes I think I will just scream.
Look, the "buyer" apparently has been "investing" in Lik for years.
So, let's say he goes to Lik and says "I want to buy this phantom shot in B&W. And since I have been a loyal customer of yours for years how much would you sell me one for".
Lik says "How about 6.5 Big Ones?.
Really, I mean is this guy just going to pull out his checkbook and write 6.5 with 5 zeroes on the end?
Personally, I think Lik is about to go bust and this is just a desperate attempt of making him look like he's doing just great.
Jogger: Better to have an RX100/G7X type compact that you keep as you upgrade phones and such.
Take care, Einstein. Next time it might not be an old lady but a guy with a knife that doesn't take too kindly to your style of "Street photography".