AD in KC: OK, I'm softening on my anger at Adobe. $10/month isn't so bad - especially now it includes some cloud storage - which is fairly useless still because you can't up-load folders, but I suspect they'll fix that eventually. Dropbox and others charge nearly as much for storage alone.
And I understand that they need to make a return on their investment. PS is the very best and I gotta have it for what I do for my livelihood. They deserve compensation.
yep Im with you AD in KC...$10 a month is a reasonable cost
Fred Dominic: Adobe is finished in my book unless they go back to being able to purchase the software that you use. The idea of "renting" software makes no sense. What if they change their policy in the future, all of the files in their proprietary format that is stored on your own computers, and all of the many hours spent producing those files will be locked away. Adobe is like a virus, in fact, it is similar to the virus CryptoLocker, where if you don't pay, there is no way to use your files.
brycesteiner ...I like that idea
mosc: It's not unique to cameras or even tech gear. Flip through your TV infomercial section to see exercise equipment and programs, jewelry, collectibles, cleaning products/equipment, cooking aids, time shares, the list is never ending. It is deep seated cultural materialistic desires routed in our love of self indulgence.
People try to feel better about themselves by purchasing rewards. Our spending patterns show a pretty direct correlation between unhappiness and "impulsive" purchases. At the extreme, people compensate for problems in their personal lives by acquiring things they enjoy in small bursts of time. This is exasperated by marketing that plagues on addictive personality traits and looks only at the moment of sale as the only value add to the company. The purchase itself is the enjoyment, not the product use.
The only real way to break this cycle is to find things you find rewarding by interaction with others or by accomplishments rather than purchases. The problem is mental.
MOSC..great post and you hit the nail on the head...Ive suffered the same in recent years and can see now what was pushing these moments of retail therapy ...
Chopingman: You're kidding right? Nikon's rich history in the optical business includes bomb sights and submarine periscopes used in the attack of Pearl Harbor. Tens of thousands of Americans were killed by optics made by Nikon. Now you all want to get indignant about a few rifle scopes used legitamently by hunters? Where exactly are your priorities?As the son of a Marine that spent a lot of time in the South Pacific killing Japaneese, and growing up in the age when "Made in Japan" was widely considered a joke, take it from me-- some people just live to be offended. I have managed to forgive and forget. I now proudly buy Nikon products, and ANY Japeneese product that is best of class. Sadly Nikon's rifle scopes are not best of class or I would proudly have a few of those too. Truly, what is the real agenda here?
well said mate
Damon Lynch: I'll keep this in mind next time I'm in the field when the wind is blowing and I'm struggling to keep my 5D Mk III & telephoto lens steady despite being mounted on a top-of-the-line tripod and ball head ;-)
But having said that, it's good to see solid testing backing up the anecdotal evidence that what really matters is the camera and lens combinations. And although it is outside the gambit if DxO, tripods and mirror lockup make a difference too of course.
lol..good call Damon ...
The Photo Ninja: Forget you Nikon. You lost me with the green screen and poor autofocus of the d800! My 5d mark III is faster, better af, better colors, and the LCD is beautiful.
D800 is now 5dIII eater...jumped too early mate LOL
RivRat: Not for me thanks. Went through both the s2 and s3 this year. The screens will crack with even the most modest of bumps. Just not rubust enough for everyday rumble and tumble.
I agree the s2 was dropped many times by me..and survived
Tommot1965: I wish the 70-200 VRII would get tested with any Nikon camera..whats the go there..why no test of such a well liked lens !!
Ive just read that results for the 70-200VR II will be posted on the 22/3/13 ...but yes the 14-24 is also a big miss
DXO need to proof read their articles..quite a few mistakes and confusing statements ...take a look at the comparison between the 24-70 Nikon and the sigma...it states that the sigma beats the Nikon in sharpness..yet the results don't show that..plus it goes onto point out that the sigma has a high CHr score which lets it down..but it doesn't point out the Nikon lens did worse ...quite a poor review and makes me question the results if such mistakes are made in other areas ...Ive never thought my Nikon 24-70 was that bad in CHR
I wish the 70-200 VRII would get tested with any Nikon camera..whats the go there..why no test of such a well liked lens !!
its a lot of money for a amateur I agree..but for a pro..I dont think so..most tradesmen would have a work car worth that much..and even more in tools of trade ...my brother has one table saw worth $10000..so taken in context of a person working on these high paid very cool fashion shoots $40,000 is par for the course
saw your image on the front page...wow..what a great capture...
Katie Piecrust: Hmm... does one choose a top of the line crop camera or a bottom of the line full frame? I think my preference is still going to be an updated 7D so long as they keep everything currently great about it, like the 100% viewfinder coverage. Adding that -3 EV and built in wi-fi would be a good start. I wonder if Canon will announce any other new cameras or if this is the last one for the year.
I also wonder if Canon is planning on eventually retiring the 1.6x crop factor sensor for good, perhaps only keeping it in their Rebels for a spell while the rest of their line goes FF. Certainly they can only take crop sensors so far before they have no choice but to increase the sensor area. Would certainly shake up the field, that's for sure. I suppose 1.3x crop could also be a possibility down the road, something Canon has played with before.
I belive crop cameras only came into existence because of the early days of sensor manufacturing making a 35mm sensor was too expensive..and thats what sprung the crop bodies...now sensor design and production costs have reduced FF cameras are back...people like Nikon and canon want you to buy long glass for FF bodies ...I personally don't shoot birds etc..and FF for me is a good choice
looks good for 6400ISO
techmine: Poor man's equivalent of legendary Nikkor 70-200 f2.8?
Jimix...your Joking right ?...the nikon 70-200 VrII is the best lens Ive ever used bar none...if you were looking for a bite..congrates as you got one :-)
SUPERHOKIE: who would buy a SD1 for $7000???? bunch of morons.
nah superhokie was right,,if anyone bought it for the RRP..they were morons