Just a Photographer: Adobe Language (Tom Hogarty):'Basically we have no plans to make Lightroom subscription-only for the foreseeable future.'
In plain language, that comes down to:'LR 5 will still be boxed but LR 6 will be in the cloud'
Does anyone have links to what adobe promised when CC was first introduced? That would be interesting.
InTheMist: This Nikon shooter is jealous!
The new 100-400 will go for $2999. This is the new lens economics.
jbancroft1957: For me the poll choices are inadequate. The subscription model and the prices involved do not suit the hobbyist photographer, plus Adobe have already said that subscribers will end up enjoying an enhanced Lightroom compared to the non-cloud version.
Bad news for the likes of me but maybe Adobe see their future security is solely with commercial users?
They are currently working on that, but you can be assured the marketing team will try pushing important features to CC to try and make it more enticing. That also means the stand alone product will get artificially limited and could be become an excuse to eliminate the stand alone product at some point.
There should be an option for concern about the future of lightroom going CC only. Yah I know they said it will stay standalone also, but they may change their mind like they did with Photoshop. Not sure if I want to continue investing time with Lightroom if this is the direction they will be going eventually. Adobe will loose a lot of Lightroom users over this concern.
azazel1024: Well, at least Lightroom is going to be traditional software still.
I think the thing that ticks me off to no end about this kind of stuff is how anti-consumer it is. They aren't doing it for the consumer's benifit. At best they are doing it to "reduce the piracy"...but you know what, I wouldn't be shocked if someone figures out how to pirate it still. You are still going to have to download an install the software, even if it is looking for a connection back to Adobe's servers. I can't picture Adobe making this true "cloud software", otherwise anyone without an internet connection is hosed.
Strike that, anyone who doesn't have a connection is hosed, it might just be those who temporarily don't have connections might not be off there is some kind of off-line mode. Otherwise, what the hell are people going to do traveling and wanting to edit pictures? What about a photographer trying to do image editing on site?
"cloud synching" and their limited online storage are not really feature
All this tells us is that Lightroom 5 will be available as a standalone package. There is no guarantee that lightroom 5 won't be the last version available this way.
The complaining will get worse when our next camera requires the Cloud service. Better start planning now for a future alternative.
Doug Pardee: The big questions: what about Lightroom? Will it be frozen, too? What about Raw file updates to it?
Yes, that would be interesting. With the recent price drop for LR4 they wouldn't be able to charge much monthly.
Now we just need an iPhone that creates RAW files and we'll be set. Then we won't have to deal with the horrible JPG engines in phones.
What a smearfest. Even the HTC with the much larger pixels completely smears the woman's hair and this is with good light at low ISO. Either not enough processing power or poor software.
I don't see a phone replacing my compact for a long while unless a phone can output to RAW.
peevee1: So much lighter... and even a little faster... now they can compete with Oly 14-150. But it should have been 11 or at least 12 at the wide end.Tamron 14-150 will have a hard time on the market now. :( I hope this will not discourage Tamron from developing further m43 lenses. But again, on 4/3 sensors, 14mm is not nearly wide enough.
Reminds me of the MP race. Soon 24mm equiv will be passé.
"the first in a new line of Raw-shooting enthusiast compacts"
So what else is coming?
Interesting to see focus peaking. Does this mean the GH3 will get it?
Also, does the G6 have a silent shutter mode with full resolution like the GH3.
joe6pack: such a shame from a manufacturer that brought us ground breaking cameras like the RX100.
Just doesn't make any sense. Sony should be leading the way with camera phones.
bossa: Could someone fill me in on what's going on here please? All posts, mine and few others bar one, that mentioned how well the K-5IIs did in the comparison still-life shots appear to have been removed from this forum.
You can find them here.
Taylor: Seems like DP would've been better off waiting to post the RAW conversions. The pre-release raw support isn't doing the D7100 any favors. There are a lot of jaggies.
That could be due to no AA filter with the D7100 sensor.
The comments for JPEG, Hi ISO and RAW comparison is the same. Just a copy from the JPEG comments.
Disappointed to see it gain 200g in weight. I was hoping it would weight less than the old lens.
raztec: I commend Nikon for the features and price point of this camera. But why do they keep dumbing cameras down and frustrating their customers?
Why the low buffer rate in RAW?Why change the battery grip from one camera body to another?Why no full metal lens mount for those big lenses?
In the past, Nikon has made some really stupid ass decisions that frustrate me to no end. These include:
Why did the D700 only have a 95% viewfinder? That was a deal breaker for me.Why did Nikon take so long to deliver FX?Why no dedicated AF on button in the D600 and D7100?Why change the C-S-M autofocus button on the D600 and D7100 when everyone's used that?What the hell was the gimicky 1 series?Where's Nikon's answer to MFT?
Buffer in Crop mode can hold 14 Raw images.
Abraxx: Buffer is already full with a few Raws in only second? Good for hunting snails... ;)Looking forward to test one, but thats unfortunately already one major design flaw.
In crop mode buffer can hold 14 RAW files.
Greynerd: It is interesting that they have left so much of the functionality of its big brother intact. Quite an interesting change from the usual marketing trick of keeping a large differential between the models. I think Olympus should be commended for that. It looks a very capable little machine and I hope the IQ turns out well. Probably most prospective buyers are probably well aware of the DOF or relative FF aperture or whatever, though I presume we will have to batten down the hatches against interminable detailed lectures on this as noted already.
That is what I like about Olympus. They also use the same sensor through their m43 line. Compare this with Panasonic who only use the latest sensor in their GH series.