SchorschB

SchorschB

Lives in United States San Francisco, United States
Joined on Mar 1, 2006

Comments

Total: 6, showing: 1 – 6

Does anyone run this on a Mac yet? I would like to know if it now supports the Retina display - which would be a reason for me to buy it.
A "Chat" with Adobe did not get an answer except for "Just subscribe to Photoshop CC"...
(apart from the Retina display support: Happy user of PSE-6 :-) )

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2013 at 21:10 UTC as 22nd comment
In reply to:

SchorschB: Has anyone heard (or seen while trying this release candidate) if Lightroom now supports the Retina display of the MacBook Pro?

It's not about the raw converter - it is about displaying the images... and not including support for the retina display will push people towards Aperture - since Aperture can display pictures on the display using all pixels.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 29, 2012 at 17:31 UTC

Has anyone heard (or seen while trying this release candidate) if Lightroom now supports the Retina display of the MacBook Pro?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 28, 2012 at 02:54 UTC as 21st comment | 3 replies
On Sony gives more detail of its OLED viewfinder article (79 comments in total)
In reply to:

neatnclean: I don't see a real advantage in using white OLEDs with colour filters instead of RGB-colored OLEDs. White OLEDs will inevitably also show some variation in their light emission/spectrum, just the same as RGB-coloured OLEDs. The colour filters themselves are just an additional element in the light path, gobbling up some of the light emitted by the OLEDs = less brightness, less brilliance.
Even more importantly: why are the pixels *rectangular* with 9.9x3.3um? In a high-res OVF I definitely expect to get equal resolution vertically and horizontally! So why not 3.3x3.3um pixels?
And the resolution itself, while better than most current, utterly disappointing low-res EVFs is nothing to really brag either. 2.4M subpixels translats into a measly XGA resolution of 1024x768 real pixels = not even "Full HD" resolution. 10 years ago that would have been quite spectacular, but certainly not in 2011. All in all, this is still at least one product generation away from "good enough for me" EVFs.

Why did they use filters instead of colored OLEDs? (1) Filters have the ability to compensate for the variations in the emissions spectrum, (2) durability: One of the big problems of OLED displays is that the different color dots age at a different speed: Blue ages fastest, red lasts the longest. This would lead to color aberrations that photographers would probably not accept. Sony, as the innovation leader in OLED (they were the first-to-market with a mass produced OLED TV in 2008) are well aware of this.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 8, 2011 at 15:35 UTC
On Sony NEX-7 high-end APS-C mirrorless camera first look article (355 comments in total)
In reply to:

klopus: No dedicated AE/AF lock??? If so it's non starter.

@MichaelSpotts: Are you using manual focus and manual exposure only?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2011 at 00:49 UTC
On Sony NEX-7 high-end APS-C mirrorless camera first look article (355 comments in total)
In reply to:

olyflyer: Maybe it is time for me to have a serious look at this camera... I liked the NEX ever since the NEX3, but the lack of built in VF stopped me from showing a serious interest, but now with this new camera it is different... The only thing I don't like (from what I read so far) is that stupid Sony specific flash shoe. Why can't Sony use the industry standard established a very long time ago is behind my comprehension.

Anyway... Excellent work Sony and good luck with the sales.
Looking forward to the full review.

Because there is no industry standard. Every manufacturer has different contacts for different purposes in different positions.
The way it is now, all Sony/Minolta flash shoe accessories will fit. Without adapter. And, so will all Metz flashes.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2011 at 17:32 UTC
Total: 6, showing: 1 – 6