would be nice if they added Pano stitching and HDR support (HDR merge)
Mssimo: "depth of field control of an 86mm F3.2 lens for a full-frame system" Why not just say this is a 32mm f1.2. It has the same DOF on a FF or a Crop system. Bokeh and light intensity of a f1.2 is also the same.
So you if like the Bokeh or DOF you get with a 32mm f1.2 lens...it will act the same way on a crop than a FF.Only thing that changes is the crop/FOV.
A 32mm f1.2 lens will have the same DOF or Bokeh on any sensor size. Only thing that changes is the FOV or Crop. If you like DOF of a 32mm or 35mm on a FF..it will be the same on a CX. So you can crop your FF to 2.7 or use it on a CX camera but the results are the same.
"depth of field control of an 86mm F3.2 lens for a full-frame system" Why not just say this is a 32mm f1.2. It has the same DOF on a FF or a Crop system. Bokeh and light intensity of a f1.2 is also the same.
sadwitch: Here's a good size comparison between vf-2 vs vf-4http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs/598/910/42.jpg
I wonder if this VF will work on the Leica M (type 240)
He could have cleaned the phones before taking the pictures ;)
Gone are the days of discounts also. How can you lower the cost per month without the current members requesting the same.
Mssimo: Did he really say that he expected negative reactions from photographers but did not care? That is how I understood his response.
"We expected a higher degree of this type of reaction from the hobbyist photographic community because currently there's not a lot of photography-specific value in our subscription products."But I guess they will still take our money even if we don't get much "Value" out of it.
Did he really say that he expected negative reactions from photographers but did not care? That is how I understood his response.
Classic Question Dodge:
How do you justify the price increase to photographers?
Last year we actually cut the price of Lightroom in half in order to open it up to a broader market of photographers.
Never seen more comments on a single post.
Mssimo: Adobe should follow the most successful software model of the last 15 years. The "App Store"(apple, android, amazon, microsoft, steam)
Sell software for $25(very low price) bucks and no one would waste time with breaking the law, key gens, viruses, bit torrents and so on. They would make up the profit loss in volume.
I would own copies of all adobe software, even if I did not have a "need" for some.
Worked for many of my friends that had the "Unlimited Trial" of lightroom 3 and now own lightroom 4 after price got cut in half.
Re: Roland,Adobe could sell any of the products for a low price if they have volume. Take all the pirated copies. Assume that maybe 50% of those would purchase the software if it was $25 bucks. Let any and all camera manufactures bundle the software with cameras. That is a few more million copies. Take computer manufactures, let them give the customer the option to have the software pre-installed for $25 bucks. In the end, adobe will not have 2 mil active licenses, they would have 200 or 300 hundred mil. Also keep in mind third world countries could never afford much for software. Exchange rate would equal 3 months pay. $25 bucks is much more reasonable.
In simple terms. Adobe could sell software for a fair price or people will download it for free. (especially third world countries)
Able to use software online only? How long could you go without a connection before software locks up on you?
Mssimo: My guess is that only the top 25% of pro's can justify the price they demand.
I see you get the point ;) ...three zeros it is!
Adobe should follow the most successful software model of the last 15 years. The "App Store"(apple, android, amazon, microsoft, steam)
Joseph Broz: I will never pay monthly for software use. Bye bye Adobe.
If the fee was $25 a month for unlimited access to all the titles..I would not have a issue with a monthly fee.
You must be confusing pro photographers with pro athletes. You were only off by two zeros.
Mssimo: Looking for software to convert DNG back to NEF.
Re: Butler,I converted all my files to DNG since I had full trust in the standard. I do not see other software vendors embracing it. The safe thing to have done is to keep the original RAW file from the manufacture. This is my concern. The best case scenario would be adobe sell PS at the same price as lightroom ($150) This is the only way Non Pro's or part time pros will continue to use the software. (due to cost)
I have 300K of DNG's from nikon and olympus. I would like to be able to use other software if needed.
My guess is that only the top 25% of pro's can justify the price they demand.
Zvonimir Tosic: All right Apple, is this what you've been waiting for to release Aperture X with Photoshop-like editing tools?
I have a few friends that made LR3 and they told me quite a bit of the "core" lightroom people left Adobe to go work on Aperture. This was just before lightroom 4 came out. My guess is aperture will get even better.