pew pew: Dear Sony haters:
Just another Canon shooterJust a Photographeryabokkie
Idk if you guys are intimidated or frustrated with your own camera, but I´m sure theres more productive things to do with your time, then dissing sony in every review.
Bottom line is that diversity, innovation and competition is ultimately better for us consumers.
@itastickup: beautiful. I installed it and configured it and it works perfectly. No more yabokkie. DPReview article comments just got a bit more useful.
yabokkie: m4/3" is a good place to test water, and since it's more difficult to design lenses for m4/3" than APS-C mirrorless mounts, all the experiences gained can be used to make better lenses for others.
You know this because you've designed how many lenses, exactly?
ConanFuji: Congratulations zkz5. Great composition.
Hugo808: Great shot.
dantome: Photography should move an emotion, and these images do, if you like you do, if you don't you don't. But the negative comments I don't get, those of you who continue to nock these images put you're work up, lets see what you can do, I am sure you can't, thats why you knock. Every photographer has a style, and she has developed her style.
If you can't do, just shut up.
You may not need to be a michelin chef to recognize overcooked steak, but on this site in particular there is a definite correlation between empty galleries and low-quality comments.
If this site had an "ignore everyone who has an empty gallery" option, the quality of the article comments in particular would be massively improved.
jhinkey: OK Nikon, now you just have to make a 24/1.8 and then you can get on to more important matters:16/2.8 AFS fisheye20/2.8 AFS45/2.8 AFS (compact please)135/1.8AFS400/5.6AFS VRand then you'll get some of my cash.
"Zeiss is only a promotional website for third-class Japanese makers."
This site desperately needs a way to ignore idiots in the article comments as well.
Munene: I need some straight advice, please: GX7 or XE2?
Background: I used to shoot with my Leica M6. I do mostly street photography. I love my GF1, but am ready to upgrade. Two issues: I do not like the way the light meter reads in GF1 (or I use it wrong), why not a match like the old days (needle, diodes)? I don't know if the exposure is correct until I press the shutter? Again, this could be me. The XE2 has a shutter dial on the camera, but how does this affect reading the light meter inside the viewfinder? THIS IS A BIG ISSUE.
So, GX7 or XE2? I am not too concerned with video or wifi or whatever, just good images. Does the fuji sensor trump the 4/3, end conversation? I sometimes enlarge to 20X24. My old Leica (and Canon FTb), I have prints 4' X 6'! Both are awesome (not really planning more, I used to print at a lab).
Unfortunately I cannot find a store that carries both for me to look at (or even one of them, where I live).
Here is what I shoot: www.visualquotations.com
"I do not like the way the light meter reads in GF1 (or I use it wrong), why not a match like the old days (needle, diodes)? I don't know if the exposure is correct until I press the shutter? Again, this could be me."
What do you mean? I have a GF1. The light meter display is at the bottom of the screen near the center. If it is in the middle (as opposed to bars on either the right or the left side) then the exposure is right. There's also an optional on-screen histogram you can activate that shows you if the exposure is correct before you shoot.
tyurek: Why do manufacturers insist on making the LCD screens only tiltable in the vertical direction?! These are not camcorders, they are still photography tools first! What will you do when you're taking a vertically oriented picture??? Isn't it a 101 of photography to force to prevent yourself from taking "horizontal" pictures all the time? Sony started this with their NEX bodies which was shocking to me. Most everyone seems to follow suit now. Apparently the people designing these are not enthusiastic about photography.
Still photography is the only thing I do with a camera. I own a camera with a display that tilts in all directions but I'd rather have a display like this. First, the camera strap always gets in the way of the display. Second, I tilt vertically much more often than horizontally but I have to move the display out horizontally before I can do that.
stefanosensolini: some body size? you mean you could go out and take photos without the lens? do not know why we continue to consider the size of the camera without lens; so the first nex were considered small, they really were not less portable to a Nikon 5200!
Johnsonj: I've had pretty lousy service whenever I've called Adobe. Almost like Best Buy is working their sales call center. Tech support sounds like India. Got some real menacing people there. And I somehow got stuck with 2 Adobe accounts and can't delete either one. They're no help. Then there was the registration for how many ??? computers for purchased copy, to which I got conflicting answers from different reps. Then there was the kid that said they could not physically ship software package and then another sweet girl (hours later) who gladly shipped me the software. This company is seriously messed up. I'm weening myself away from Lightroom. I hate computer time for PP anyway. I'll be developing a bare-bones workflow around iPhoto and iMovie. To hell with adobe.
"Apple doesn’t require software authorizations"
Apple's authorization is required to get any software onto an iphone at all.
lasvideo: Thinking of signing up for the @adobe Creative Cloud? Some of these horror stories might change your mind. http://forums.adobe.com/community/creative_cloud
Remember to change your passwords and check your bank account for the next several month to make sure the hackers that got all that sensitive data from Adobe don't access your accounts.
New Adobe Survey. If you are not happy with CC being the only choice, let them know. http://deploy.ztelligence.com/start/survey/survey_taking.jsp?PIN=16BNF7XXXKLNX
"Remember to change your passwords"
Never use the same password for more than one thing
Joe Mayer: How many black eyes can Adobe endure? This is not a riddle but tragic reality. A loss of customer's data, encrypted or not, causes customers to be rattled. Worrisome too is the newly revealed loss of photoshop source code along with the code of acrobat. I wonder if Adobe still realizes the full extent of the attack or if more is yet to come.
"Worrisome too is the newly revealed loss of photoshop source code along with the code of acrobat"
Augestflex: Not happy that my account was compromised. The letter I received from Adobe mentions that in some cases Adobe's encryption software was used to decrypt information before it left their network. So yeah, now, in addition to changing passwords I need to worry about my credit card and potential fraudulent charges. Honestly, if it isn't already a practice, companies that have breeches of these nature should be fined for their inability to protect important financial and private data of their customers.
"So yeah, now, in addition to changing passwords"
How many passwords do you have to change? You should be using a different password for everything...
l_d_allan: I got an official-looking warning email from mail.adobesystems.com, which seems suspicious. Phishing?
I would have expected that the email would have come from adobe.com
Having to copy and paste a link from a plain text email does not increase a message's authenticity. Adobe could have sent an HTML messages with linked URLs. You can check links just as easily by just reading them out of the browser's address bar or by hovering over them in most email software. In fact, by doing it there you can take advantage of the browser's certificate validation as well.
The "From" header can be set arbitrarily anyway and tells you nothing about a message's true origin.
jagge: It does NOT make sense. It would have made a LOT of sense to make a 15 mm 1.4 lense or even 1.2 then you could get some ff like wideangle feel.
Why go for a 15 mm. 1.7 when there is a 17 1.8 out there. Is it to difficult with a 1.4 version ? I would LOVE that lense
> > Is it to difficult with a 1.4 version ?
> not at all.
> it should be easy to make a budget f/1.0 (say > 400 US)
And you know this because you've designed how many lenses, exactly?
*yawn*. Only equivalent to 900mm f/48 on my uncle sam's satellite mounted cameras.
GradyPhilpott: An organization I belong to that restores former military aircraft has trademarked each one so that no one can take pictures and sell those photographs for a profit or use them in any other way without permission.
I don't know where the manufacturers come in, if in fact any of them are still in business.
You're restoring the aircraft to their original condition?
These comments are actually only equivalent to f/5.6 on a full fr... er... wait...
Mike Ronesia: This one was my favorite. Very nice work.
Glad to hear you liked it so much - thanks!