And so the metabones speed booster isn't that fast after all - although it increases the speed without any doubt! What?!?!?!
It is really about time to change the term used in the English speaking photography community for the capability of a lense to let through more or less light. The term "speed" is absolutely misleading. We from non-english speaking countries have to endure the torture of reading photography related material translated from English by people who have no clue about photography.
This can look like this (my attempt to make an impression of what we actually have to read in our language - because someone translated literally something he didn't understand what it's about - but then who can blame them given the English text):
"This lens is very fast, although it isn't fast at all."
When we say in our language that a lens is fast, it always relates to it's ability to perform any kind of mechanical operation in a short time period. Yet when we wan't to address it's quality of light gathering, we use two words, the translation would be: "light power". Doesn't that make more sense?!
I see I'm not the only one with similar thoughts about this toy thing.Well, I like all kinds of technical toys, no matter how still imperfect, but I hate ridiculous and absolutely useless design. This Lytro thing is obviously designed for people who love to be pushed to the limits of their ergonomical tolerance. Same thing with the apple mouse, after ten minutes cramps in the fingers and palm. Apple faithfuls tell me: you give up too easily! - Isn't that cute as an explanation :)On the other hand I love this idea of focusing after focusing (I don't know the proper name for it). But designwise ... you guys said it all with your comments before ...
So if we think the camera companies aren't reading our complaints on this and similar forums, then we are mistaken. I think they are reading them very carefully and when they see what we would like to see on cameras - they try to avoid it more or less to incorporate in new models - so that they'll never make THE perfect camera! Why?! Well, once you buy a perfect camera you will not feel the need to buy another one.My suggestion: let's do the opposite! Let's write here how happy we are with all the new camera models, how perfect they are, how unnecessary all further improvements would be, and so on....
It is interesting to read how different the reasons for disappointment are. And I don't see them all to be logical since Canon most certainly isn't closing the DSLR program - and the EOS-M system isn't trying simply to make the DSLR's two or three sizes smaller. I understand that. But here goes my story of disappointment (and not just with this new Canon system, but with all similar mirrorless systems so far): where is the grip???You can have a camera without a built-in flash. You can have a camera with just 3 fps, with most of the functions accessible only through menus ... but you have to hold the camera in your hand all the time - and without a grip you will soon get cramps in your fingers. So this is my reason for saying: I don't get it!On the other hand: I do get it! - We buy a sophisticated camera only to see it doesn't satisfy us for some reason. So after a while we buy a camera from the other class - hopefully (for the respective company) from the same brand.
what's wrong with his ears??
DtEW: I have no problem with Joe Klamar. Every photographer will have great days, off-days, and WTF-days, which is apparently what happened here.
I don't know why nothing has been said about the editors who chose these images to be published. As far as I'm concerned, they were the ones who completely dropped-the-ball on this one.
Theh photo of Try Harder is hilarious!
I see a new era of photography on the rise :)Cool. The guys look really cool, a refreshing approach ;)Especially with a D70, hehe. Maybe they'll discover some new talents as comedians.
thomash2: I'm annoyed with devices without replacable batteries. I have a HTC desire phone which I use for gps tracking over several days and need a couple other batteries to get me through the days. newer HTC phones do not have replacable batteries and other products are going the same way.I had a laptop battery died once but it was easy and cheap to buy a replacement. I wouldn't buy a laptop where i couldn't replace the battery myself. I wouldn't want to have to spend an extra $100 for someone else to do it for me if the laptop had to be disassembled for a custom installed battery.
I totally agree.The manufacturers though disagree strongly :(
Truth be told - new cameras are less and less ergonomic in their design. They are smaller and smaller, that's true, but they are getting harder and harder to be held in one's hand for longer than 30 seconds. And I'm not talking about 100 dollar compact cameras. For example the Olympus PEN cameras. Very good cameras, for somebody's taste maybe even chic - but compared to the E-System a pain in the hand. All they need is big bulky grip on the right side - and there you can put a big battery, and replace it when necessary. But given the problems of global economy where everybody has already almost everything - manufacturers need to find ways to sell you something of high-tech value which will soon after the purchase give up it's spirit in a high-tech manner for high-tech reasons so everybody will say wooowww, I'll have to have another one, that's soooo coool ;)
In the case of many manufacturers like Apple - it is a ploy, cynical or not. I see this new technology as something interesting and usable for scientific devices, but a replaceable battery in a commercial device is for me the better, more ecological and more fair solution.
plastique2: Lightroom does not do the same job - at least not on Windows. ACDSee's database management properties are better, more simple and faster than Lightroom's, Aperture's or iPhoto's. I have tried ACDSee on my Mac, it's very slow and by far not as good as the Windows version. Hopefully the new version is better, although some of you say it isn't.I have installed Windows on my iMac because I haven't found any solution for the OSX environment for a fast image processing workflow as is the combination of Adobe Photoshop (Elements), ACDSee Pro and FastStone ImageViewer. All software solutions I have tried on OSX are a joke mildly spoken.Of course - if I had the apple virus in me that makes me love everything apple no matter what - then I'd still be fumbling in Apple's Preview and always preselect the images I want to view in a row and imagine how good that I have to do this this way - there must be a higher reason for this which I haven't figured out, but Apple knows for sure, so why worry.
Apologies accepted. I see, you now intend to even surpass me in politeness and choice of words!Yet you still sound like someone is trying to force you to switch to acdsee.I'm too curious how I came to my conclusion.It is a rather overwhelming argument you are using: so many are doing it - then it must be right!I never said that LR is a bad software. I said acdsee can do the category assigning job in a more straightforward way. And I'm not talking about acdsee for osx, that one is horrible, really uncomparable with the win version.So have you ever worked with acdsee on windows? Or would it have hurt your pride :)The image editing capabilities of LR are much better than those of acdsee, but that's not a problem if using parallely a good image editor.And I will try out LR one more time. I can do that. I'm not competing in the Pride UltimateFightingChampionship.
Marius Oosthuizen: The PC version of ACDSEE Pro 5.2 is a dream product with no flaws whatsoever, and for me it is one of the most simple photo editing and viewing software out there. i've tried them all ( Photoshop, Lightroom, Aperture, etc etc ... ) It handles batch workflow jobs like a dream, and it take less than a hour to learn from scratch, if you are n newcomer to photo editing software.
I feel sorry for my Mac user friends who struggle with the software, maybe this new version will iron out all the problems found in previous versions.
Happy photo editing.. :)
I pretty much agree with you :)
Taking pride in my stupidity? What strong words?I'm pretty sure you wouldn't say that into my face. Or would you?Are YOU making a joke? Or are YOU taking pride in your anonimity?
Gothmoth: sorry plastique2 but your talking nonsense.
if you make such ridiculous statements then please give some detailed information where acdsee´s database is better then lightrooms. it may be faster when using v5 .... i can´t be bothered to check version 5....but acdsee has way less database features. it´s not even in the same league as lightroom.
i can give you the detailed information that acdsee has not even a proper color management under windows:
and that is a PRO tool? good joke.....
Lightroom is by all means a PRO tool. Happy?I had to wait for hours to go go through all my photos (several hundred thousand) and to make an unacceptably huge database file with all the unimportant (unimportant to me) info for all those images. This approach is similar to Aperture's as well as iPhoto's (which isn't a PRO tool, I'd call it jokeware).ACDSee on the other hand concentrates on those images I am interested in. This makes it faster and more simple to use - for me at least.Of all the programs I have tried ACDSee suits best my needs, and Lightroom is the PRO tool that keeps annoying me (me, me, not you, not you).I made my first statement in response to other claims that acdsee is useless and so on.I am aware of the color management issue and I'm not happy about it, but I'm not a professional, so I'm managing somehow.There are though other things in acdsee that are bothering me.Yet above all I find unacceptable that on OSX there is no good image browser.
Lightroom does not do the same job - at least not on Windows. ACDSee's database management properties are better, more simple and faster than Lightroom's, Aperture's or iPhoto's. I have tried ACDSee on my Mac, it's very slow and by far not as good as the Windows version. Hopefully the new version is better, although some of you say it isn't.I have installed Windows on my iMac because I haven't found any solution for the OSX environment for a fast image processing workflow as is the combination of Adobe Photoshop (Elements), ACDSee Pro and FastStone ImageViewer. All software solutions I have tried on OSX are a joke mildly spoken.Of course - if I had the apple virus in me that makes me love everything apple no matter what - then I'd still be fumbling in Apple's Preview and always preselect the images I want to view in a row and imagine how good that I have to do this this way - there must be a higher reason for this which I haven't figured out, but Apple knows for sure, so why worry.
The V1/J1 system is the first serious Nikon's mistake in my opinion. It is most certainly a mistake from the viewpoint of advanced photographers and serious enthusiast photographers. But maybe, and only maybe, it might reveal itself as a good selling stuff for would-be photographers who were so far shunning the big DSLR's with big lenses - now they maybe will think: this is made for us - the same stuff as the big DSLR's - just much smaller! And they might even end up happy with these high tech toy cameras and Nikon will happily sell them all the production-cost-efficient additional toy-accessories like F-mount lens adapters and other funny things!
I hope the Second Coming will be soon and this sell-buy-buy-sell trickery will vanish for all eternity.