Kiril Karaatanasov

Kiril Karaatanasov

Lives in Bulgaria Bulgaria
Has a website at http://www.karaatanasov.info
Joined on Mar 31, 2006

Comments

Total: 82, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

spatz: It would be great if Adobe made their old versions of Lightroom compatible with new cameras. Having to upgrade Lightroom with each new camera is a pain, and frankly, completely unnecessary from a software development perspective. Of course, when people have to pay for each upgrade, at least in the short term it makes commercial sense, but within the Adobe CC subscription model, there's really no reason not to support new cameras and lenses with old versions of Lightroom

There is all the difference of supporting one or two or five versions of a software. Supporting new camera in two versions is about twice the cost for Adobe as most processes need to run twice except for writing the code which in modern world happens to be only small fraction of the cost

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2014 at 05:59 UTC
In reply to:

NDT0001: Frankly im tired of people here taking every opportunity to bash Adobe, if its not complaints about the the CC subscription model, it would be complaints about upgrade price or some other easy complaint. BLAH BLAH BLAH.
Seems that the only people complaining are amateurs and Pro-sumers who happily spend a FORTUNE on hardware upgrades/accessories but cry over a $10 a month subscription fee. And YES i know if i deregister the software i wont have access to edited files, and guess what? If i wish to do that ill work off the raws again or export my work with edits as a non proprietary file like a tif or DNG. The subscription model is good for me, makes software managemet easier and actually COST ME LESS in the long run and i really cant see myself not using their software in the foreseeable future. So you know what? If your not happy with Adobe's business practices, please vote with your wallet and spare us all the moaning and hand wringing.

I bought Lightroom 5 with no CC subscription. I then subscribed as it is quite decent price and I use Photoshop CC. I persist Photoshop edits in tiff while working and jpg at the end. Light room I own so as long as there is windows or macos I can run it.

I keep my raw files though I should probably move to dng. Support for some older cameras seems to vanish from new software

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2014 at 05:54 UTC
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (1047 comments in total)
In reply to:

l_d_allan: Why not use RAW instead of JPEG?

Thanks @Barney Britton and Rashi Sanyal.

I asked the same thing pretty much. If you can provie both JPG and RAW that would be awesome.

Did you use to publish ACR/Lightroom results in the past?

Direct link | Posted on May 7, 2014 at 18:54 UTC
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (1047 comments in total)
In reply to:

RichRMA: Nikon and the other FF makers have hit a brick wall. The only way to jump it is to go bigger with the sensor, like the Leica S2 and the Pentax 645

Why would that be?

Nikon and Sony have very diverse cameras with full frame sensor. Low res high sensitivity, great balanced 24mp offerings and hiRes 36mp models.

I see lots of opportunity for amateur photographer to move to full frame at decent price and enjoy much higher IQ. I am very happy with A7 and was happy with D600 and would have kept the Nikon had there not been the oil spill disaster

Direct link | Posted on May 7, 2014 at 06:38 UTC
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (1047 comments in total)
In reply to:

saralecaire: So they're trying to convince us with this article that the D4s is different from the D4 sensor?

This is comparing JPG images and not necessarily the sensors of the cameras.

Direct link | Posted on May 7, 2014 at 06:34 UTC
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (1047 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kiril Karaatanasov: DPREVIEW guys do you think many D4s users shoot JPEG? Can you compare RAW files e.g. d4 vs d4s? Also is 5d mk3 and A7 in same league at all? How about 1Dx? Best will be test against A7s which seems to be closest in terms of sensor to D4s

Wow lots of reaction. I am familiar with wedding photogs and fashion guys they seem to use only RAW. There are some advantages to RAW e.g. Pulling detail out of shadows and bright skies. Also when significant exposure change is to be made jpg produces often posterization artifacts.

The first reply is very ignorant and I find it somewhat offensive. Good in camera JPG is for me a nice feature but not a priority when looking for a camera. So Fuji and Olympus or other brand have to win me with other things - lenses, sensor size etc.

Anyway thanks for the other replies. So it seems D4s and alike find fair use of its JPG when time is of essence.

Direct link | Posted on May 7, 2014 at 06:27 UTC
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (1047 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tord S Eriksson: Just tested the studio tool with the D4s and the NEX-5T (a fairly modern APS-C/DX camera), and found that their ISO capacity did vary that much:

I selected incandescent light, and the patch of greenery in the upper right corner. Set the ISO to 102400, which the 5T can't follow, so stopped at 25600, and as far as I can see (I use a calibrated iMac) there was little difference in noise, at that setting. Menas a camera that costs maybe a tenth of the D4s can deliver almost the same image quality, just two ISO steps behind!

Tried the D610 as well, but that doesn't go any further either, but seems to be just one ISO step behind, at less than half the cost! Lowering the D4s to 51200 gives a very similar result, if not the same color balance!

An amazing camera in many ways, this new D4s, but had I the money to buy one, I'd buy a RX1R, and throw a party!

ISO 12800 to say ISO 51200 is two stops difference. In essence you are repeating what the OP said 5T is 2 stops behind D4s and costs 350 US dollars. D610 is only a stop behind and is decent DSLR.

Direct link | Posted on May 6, 2014 at 23:18 UTC
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (1047 comments in total)

DPREVIEW guys do you think many D4s users shoot JPEG? Can you compare RAW files e.g. d4 vs d4s? Also is 5d mk3 and A7 in same league at all? How about 1Dx? Best will be test against A7s which seems to be closest in terms of sensor to D4s

Direct link | Posted on May 6, 2014 at 23:12 UTC as 59th comment | 12 replies
On Sony Australia releases a3500 with new kit lens article (141 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shamael: a3500 is a renamed 3000 with a more crappy lens, that's all what is about. If they had sold 3000 cheaper with that lens and updated the firmware, it had been exactly the same effect. Those cameras are toys for children, despite the fact that the IQ is just stunning with a good lens. If it had focus peaking, i would buy one for my daughter.

Does not it have peaking? All Sony cams do

Direct link | Posted on Mar 25, 2014 at 00:50 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7R Review preview (795 comments in total)

@DPR will you be publishing tests for the lenses? 24-70 is interesting to me. Review mentions this lens does better than the kit lens. would be nice to have a bit deeper assessment - aberrations, bokeh, flare.....

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2014 at 22:53 UTC as 185th comment
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1600 comments in total)

Weird even the long time anti-Sony protagnist Ken Rockwell likes A7 but DPR does not?

http://www.kenrockwell.com/sony/a7.htm

How much do DPR stand to gain from the smear campaign?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 26, 2014 at 13:16 UTC as 98th comment | 1 reply
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1600 comments in total)
In reply to:

Abhiru: I used to value dpreview information a lot, but this review struck me as strongly biased; there must be a VERY GOOD REASON for dpreview to risc their reputation in such a blatant way.

Barney did you read the M1 review and the A7 review?

Same defects praised in one and in the other damned...Sorry but the DPR is no more than cheap advertisement site at this point for me.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 26, 2014 at 09:04 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review preview (2143 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kiril Karaatanasov: ...and what battery life did you get? Is 350 frames ok for M1 since ..it is not a high profile camera as another one which too does 350 frames on a battery charge, but is evidently higher class and so is judged differently?

What is limited in the A7 bracketing?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 26, 2014 at 09:01 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1600 comments in total)
In reply to:

MikeF4Black: I'm not sure, but I think noone has mentioned the LA adapters yet. Don't they negate the whe "Oh so light, oh so small" concept, and look slightly rodiculois as well? They must serve a very important purpose (VIP).

If you own Alpha lenses these adapters work well. Note that alpha us DSLR line and the lenses are quite big so adapter size is often negligable. I use a 35-105 and 70-210/4 lenses and they are much bigger than a7 plus adapter. There are also bigger lenses still 135/1.8, 70-400 , 24-70/2.8 etc.

It is not a walkabout combo for sure. It is a working setup that yields quality results.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 26, 2014 at 06:05 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1600 comments in total)
In reply to:

naththo: We need to report straight to Sony for problem with JPEG and for the RAW lossy compression. They really need to add feature for option to choose from using RAW max 14 bit or choose lossy compression of 12 bit. And we need to let them know there is a serious side effect problem with JPEG when using High ISO NR on even you are shooting as low iso as 50 or 100, still exhibit banding/posterisation/artifacts. Sharpening is good so far not as oversharpened like Nex 7. Sony people who work at Sony do not come here to see problems here. They expect to hear from you through phone call or email or through technical support. If you don't send, they don't know what is really happening.

On the BIG COMPANY. I too work for one and many of us engineers have a goal set to visit our forums and actually help users. So....

Direct link | Posted on Jan 25, 2014 at 08:19 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1600 comments in total)
In reply to:

naththo: We need to report straight to Sony for problem with JPEG and for the RAW lossy compression. They really need to add feature for option to choose from using RAW max 14 bit or choose lossy compression of 12 bit. And we need to let them know there is a serious side effect problem with JPEG when using High ISO NR on even you are shooting as low iso as 50 or 100, still exhibit banding/posterisation/artifacts. Sharpening is good so far not as oversharpened like Nex 7. Sony people who work at Sony do not come here to see problems here. They expect to hear from you through phone call or email or through technical support. If you don't send, they don't know what is really happening.

lossy compression is 14 bit as well!!!

DPr have no clue what they are discussing in that section. Sorry to have to go to such explanation.

Sony compression just record 7 or 8 bits per pixel and supplements few more bits of info on a group of (I remember 16 )similarly colored pixels.

They also apply a sort of curve to the RAW file to remove some highlight detail that is never reproduced in JPEGs and in this way focus more on shadow detail.

So RAW file is 14 bit.

I agree ti would be nice from Sony to add uncompressed RAW for comparison purpose and for situation one feels deserves the extra space.

A7 is higher end camera than M1 and A99 so certainly it needs a bit more options.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 25, 2014 at 08:16 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1600 comments in total)
In reply to:

Avobanana: I agree with many points about handling and operational speed as well as auto ISO. But the image quality part is bull crap.

I own the 5D3 and many more canon lenses. And I don't own the A7 but A7R. I have used and seen samples from the A7 though. From my experience I can objectively say that the Sony beat the Canon flat out in image quality in both RAW and JPEG and bear in mind the Canon cost twice as much.

Strange that in the review of the 5D3 there isn't any dissecting of JPEG file to check for posterization and the likes. Neither for the EM1 which has such an upbeat tone throughout the review. Image quality were simply described as great or excellent for these cameras. Why not we put those images side by side and compare? Same price, same size what's stopping them? No they have to dig up obscure problems in JPEG.

It feels as if review works were done after they have a set opinion of a camera and then go out of their way to search for evidence to prove their point.

Agree on this!

It is not the findings of the review. I would love every review to be this punctual.

It is the language and the sense that they somehow had to find things to complain about. Most of the cons apply to M1 just as much. The only one they mention in the M1 review is the problem with AF in poor light.

But M1 shares much more - JPEG over processing at default settings short battery life, compressed RAW to name a few. M1 even has other problems on its own that were skipped - I was amazed to see M1 has not enough processing power to keep decent frame rate with various options turned on. This is a huge problem for all Olympus cameras and DPR choose to ignore it review after review.

The D600 review too overlooks a bunch of issues that are a problem in daily use. Ok in that case they do skim through the issues but kind of do not include them in the overall rating in the cons secrtion.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 25, 2014 at 08:11 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1600 comments in total)
In reply to:

Heaven is for real: Out of the 1100 comments, I can count how many agreed with the review because probably they never tried the camera, never owned this camera or hate Sony in general. On the other hand, probably close to 95% A7 owners disapprove of the findings by DP in regards to JPG quality. How could 95% be so wrong or maybe DP is wrong? It is like majority of scientists believe global warming is man made and a few it is not!

@Simon guys I wish you keep the same level of punctuality as you do with A7 on every review you guys make.

Unfortunately form my own experience with other cameras like M1 and D600 I see you overlook issues on those cameras to produce a positive rating.

M1 for example has too slow of a processor for the many functions it offers and it struggles often to respond sometimes even blocks. I did not see this in the cons section.

D600 had far too many ergonomic compromises that you mentioned lightly in the review and those are a substantial problem in daily use. Much bigger problem that A7s manual focusing Aids or iso settings.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 25, 2014 at 07:51 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review preview (2143 comments in total)

...and what battery life did you get? Is 350 frames ok for M1 since ..it is not a high profile camera as another one which too does 350 frames on a battery charge, but is evidently higher class and so is judged differently?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 24, 2014 at 23:46 UTC as 44th comment | 7 replies
On Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review preview (2143 comments in total)

BTW where is the section on compressed RAW that Olypus are using and analysis of the effects of this compresison? or this is only for high profile cameras? and M1 is a.. ..not so high profile?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 24, 2014 at 23:44 UTC as 45th comment | 1 reply
Total: 82, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »