So judging will only take about 9 months? That's some impressive speedy judging.
radissimo: No sony FE 55/1.8= no vote
It wasn't on last year's list, either. It was very new in late 2013. The FE 55 should be on a list.
nandbytes: wow what happened to all the FE sony lenses? not to mention FE55, one of the sharpest lenses around!
I assumed the FE 55 didn't make last year's list because it was not really out in the wild in time. It should certainly be on a list.
joao 43: How does it compare to Zeiss 55mm FE? Since Sony users can use this lens it would be useful to know. The 55mm was according to DXO the best 50mm after the Otus, what's you opinion Andy Westlake?
I was just about to ask about the Zeiss 55 FE, so thanks. I guess we'll have to wait until Sigma releases an A mount version of the 50 Art to really see a comparison between the FE 55 and the 50 Art. If nothing else, these are both going to be swell runner ups to the Otus for a fraction of the cost.
cheddargav: As a wedding photographer, I just want someone to give me 2 of these, the 23 1.4 and 56 1.2 for 2 weddings and I can compare it to my Canons. If the AF and overall performance is on a par with the 6D, I'm in
Canon 6D AF is perfectly acceptable for wedding situations. Use the center AF point and you get fast AF at -3EV, which should work better than any camera within a few thousand dollars. Tracking AF is certainly not on par with the Canon 5D Mark III, but tracking AF for a slow wedding is overkill. ;~)
babalu: Hey, can this be true ??The one point which probably has led to this camera not getting the highest award, is : No In Camera RAW conversion. Well, that feature IS available with the GX7. See user manual page 140 .Quality modes available include RAW+JPEG, whereby JPG can even be set to high or low quality . Am I blind or completely off the topic, or what ?
I shoot a Sony NEX 5N and a Canon 6D and have no intention of ever getting a Micro 4/3 camera or even another APS-C camera for that matter. But to see a nitpick item like being unable to take a RAW image and then convert it to a certain style of JPG seems frivolous to me. Shoot RAW+JPG or, better yet, shoot RAW and then use Google's NIK package in Lightroom to far exceed what any in camera effects can do. Or just join Instagram and apply th effects they offer. But I envision shooting RAW and then wanting to apply a JPG effect after the fact to a shot and doing it in camera is going to affect less than 1% of the people who shoot this camera. In other words, meh.
kwa_photo: I think Apple will do a 4.0 of Aperture X in the not too distant future and when they do...it will be done very well IMO. It's just a matter of how long do we want to wait. It's similar to the Mac Pro with no updates for years....
I waited and waited for Aperture X or 4 or whatever and finally gave up. Switched to the current Lightroom and cannot envision that Apple's next version of Aperture will pass Lightroom up (well, technically this 3.5 is the next version and it didn't come close). ;~)
This looks like a great option from Tamron. With the recent emergence of some stellar lenses from Sigma (e.g., the 35/1.4 is perhaps the best 35 prime for DSLRs) and now this offering from Tamron, the 3rd party lens makers are providing nice competition and great options for consumers. Yay.
sean lancaster: I am still using Photoshop CS3 that I bought at the educator price. So, the price jump on the subscription model is astronomical for me if I were to upgrade since I haven't spent a dime in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013. I use Photoshop just in an emergency since Lightroom does most of what I need 99% of the time. I hate to spend money on Photoshop to use it once every month or two. I get that Adobe wants to stop pirates, but they've also ensured that when CS3 stops working for me I'll be finding another solution. Sigh.
I will continue to use CS3 until it no longer works. I was just thinking ahead to when it doesn't work and wondering if my only option then will need a subscription.
I am still using Photoshop CS3 that I bought at the educator price. So, the price jump on the subscription model is astronomical for me if I were to upgrade since I haven't spent a dime in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013. I use Photoshop just in an emergency since Lightroom does most of what I need 99% of the time. I hate to spend money on Photoshop to use it once every month or two. I get that Adobe wants to stop pirates, but they've also ensured that when CS3 stops working for me I'll be finding another solution. Sigh.
I've been very pleased with NIK's DFine, but I don't see it was reviewed. Is it just not considered good? I certainly like it over Lightroom, though.
Well, this is titled pretty badly. I expected to learn more about Flickr . . . the site I only use on my computer with my RX1 for my photography. This is all about phone apps for snapshots. Sigh.
The D800 had the AF issue that turned me away. Now the D600 has the dust issue that turns me away (along with the lack of 1 button press to get 100% review), so I am down to the Canon 5D Mark III and the Sony A99 (or keeping my NEX 5N and getting an RX1). I wish Nikon had better Q.C.
sweetchops: I think this would have worked better with the focus on the dog.
Perhaps, but I it's gotten 22 favorites on Flickr and most of my photos only get a few favorites. The feedback on this one has been incredible, so I think it works great for the people who love it. I was trying to highlight fall and thought I did that.
It's unfortunate that the little bit of grass (the line) cuts across the top right corner.
The water looks like it's going to spill out of the photo to the left.
jannefoo: This is good business... for Getty. The photographer gets pennies after Getty's 80% slice.
I've been on Flickr for about 7 years or so. I've made $0 on my own. Getty contacted me yesterday and added 6 of my photos. I'll be joining and contributing the photos (and more in the future). If I don't make any money then I still lose nothing other than the little time it takes to fill out the online forms. If I make even $10 then I'll start calling myself a pro photographer since I am making money off of my photography. That'll be worth it. ;~)
"The E-mount that could do that would be a little different than the E-mount that we know today. But it is possible. Much of the lens geometry you see in the RX1 is what it would take to realize that design."So, lenses that recess well into the body to work on a full frame sensor are what we have with the 1 lens on the RX1. If they are thinking that they can build a FF NEX, for example, and have a new line of recessed lenses, I hope they realize that building it in a way that doesn't allow legacy glass will probably kill most of the excitement people will have for this camera.
Dailypix: I am not sure how to post an image. I used to post the url to the jpg but now the image does not show, just the link. What am I doing wrong?
There is a button you can click in above the text entry box that allows you to just post the URL to the image that is hosted elsewhere. It works just swell. I like it better because some people used to post full sized images previously and they'd show up full sized; now they are resized and users have the option to view the full size if they want it.
Also, if I link to the full size version of an image on Flickr then the EXIF data gets displayed. If I link to an individual sized version (e.g., width 1024) then the EXIF data is not displayed in the thread on the image. If this is an error from Flickr then that's probably that, but if if it's something easily fixed then that would be appreciated. Thanks.