dash2k8: Of course full-frame is the end-point we should all aspire to, otherwise we're not much for aspirations, are we? It's like saying we should only aspire for a cheap sedan because it has a lower maintenance cost than a luxury vehicle. Such a defeatist mentality is selling ourselves short. Had NASA thought this way, we would never have gotten on the moon. The higher we aim, the higher we will go.
Anyone who only ever aspires to an APS-C body is not going to go far in photo (which is fine, since for some ppl, photography is just for fun). However, it's one thing to not be able to afford an FF system, it's another to be complacent and say "this is good ENOUGH." When that word appears, you know corners are cut and goals reduced. We should all aspire to FF bodies and beyond.
To clarify, I have nothing against ppl who shoot for fun. But I do have a problem with the words "good enough."
If this were a valid argument we would all aspire to drive Escalades and laugh at sports cars and motorcycles. Handling and usability are also some of the many factors.
It is funny how many "photographers" focus so much time arguing the technology and so little time capturing the art. The great photographers in history had a fraction of the toolbox we have and still inspire us. The camera used and enjoyed is the best tool for the job.
Did the monkey sign a release stating that all photos were the property of said photographer?
Yep, actually not legal (without a permit anyway) in any national park according to the news this morning. Someone was harassing bighorn sheep in Zion this weekend.
ThePhilips: DPR, can you make an article about bags for mirrorless cams?
Most camera bags I could find fall into two categories:
- Too large for the smaller package (esp lens pockets are way oversized even for Oly 1.8/45). (A.K.A. DSLR bags.)
- Fit camera+lens well, but have little/no room for extra lenses, not even the pancakes. (A.K.A. P&S/video cam bags.)
The big issue with targeted mirrorless bags is that they are targeted at the entry user with a 2 lens kit max. Try to fit an OMD E-M1 and you are sending bags back left and right. Take the Mirrorless Mover 30i by Think Tank. First it is nowhere near as nice as their Retrospective line. Secont it is less usable than your typical Lowepro or Tamarac. The OMD just doesn't work here but a Samsung NX 300 works great. I settled on a Tenba Mini Messenger for the OMD and really like a bag with a lens down camera cradle. I would have looked at this bag too if it were available but the easy access on the Tenba still wins out.
Yes I voted for the OMD-E-M1 but need to say that the Samsung NX300 that I have been attached to for the past year is a remarkable camera and will not be far from the Olympus. In fact the Samsung has more WiFi capabilities and better video. As far as the photos are concerned, the Nx300 produced magnificent tack sharp results with pleasing color. With more lenses it would be my only mirrorless system. That said the control and upcoming pro lenses for the E-M1kept me from abandoning Olympus.
This camera is about innovation, not necessarily a step up in the photographic experience. Most if not all will be better served by a NX300 which is a superb camera that produces wonderful images in my experience (the Oly has collected some dust). The comment regarding a limited lens selection is misleading. The Samsung lens range is very similar to other systems, only the Micro 4/3 lens map dwarfs it. With the addition of a long telephoto I would consider the NX line a complete system. The electronic companies are beginning to give the traditional camera companies some competition. Time will tell who wins in the end.
ronmyers_us: In the past, I used Bibble Pro. When Bibble sold out to Correl, the name was changed to After Shot Pro. This software is availble for Windows, Mac and Linex. I like it because of the capability to make adjustments to selected areas independent of the rest of the picture. I have only compared it to the raw file processing addition to Photoshop Elements and find it much superior. In addition to allowing adjustments to selected areas, one can also clone and heal areas of the photo. It does not eliminate the need for editors (like Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro) to complete editing, but it does provide capabilities which I am unable to do after conversion to jpg or tiff format.
Also, the cost is less than any of these three programs. It would be great to see how this less expensive software compares to the higher priced software.
ASP is a great RAW developer. Been Bibble since v4 and love the speed your are able to process hundreds of photos. Yes the software has not really changed much since Bibble 5 but what is there works and works well.