Wye Photography: For me personally, and this may apply to others as well. Photoshop CS2 did everything I needed. Later version added nothing I wanted. I do 99% of my processing in Lightroom so paying a huge amount of money for Photoshop upgrades is just not worth it. I looked around for a Photoshop replacement, used Elements for a while but then found Pixelmator. For around £12 it really is a photoshop replacement, it does what I want it to do without all those features I don't need and use. After a large number of tests the Pixelmator healing brush is actually superior to Photoshop's.
The point of this, I guess, is that there are alternatives to the seeming Adobe monopoly. Save yourself money by looking around.
Thanks Adobe but I think you are an overpriced dinosaur waiting for an extinction event.
Could´nt agree less to this. There were some major improvements between Photoshop CS2 and the current status of Photoshop CC. May be there was no need to go with every renewal, but the differences between those two versions are substantial.
Very weak performance of ALL companies for the world’s leading imaging fair. Two boring DSLRs from Nikon and Canon, nothing from Sony, an over-priced Zeiss lens, no new Sigma ART lens, no new Software from Adobe (LR 6?)....
$799 for a Nikon lens doesn´t sound like high-end landscape lens matching the D810 resolution...let´s wait and see the first reviews.
3systermuser: read DXO mark on this one, you will see the IQ is the same or extremely similar to that of the D800E.and considering the price difference between the D810 and the D800E, there is no point getting it if you do not need a touch better AF, a bit better LV,etc over the D800E.I think this is what D800E should have been, but it is now already dated even at this point, Nikon should focus its very limited R and D money onto FX mirrorless.for me , the Sony A7R wins over all this extremely old dated D-SLR.
Why is it dated? The D810 delivers best image quality of all current full format sensor cameras together with a fantastic optical view finder, nice display, fast autofocus, huge number of lenses and this is all based on a technology platform which has been proven to deliver results under most demanding conditions. A true professional instrument! If you are as good as a photographer you should be proud of yourself!
Wouldn´t it make more sense to wait for the final versions of the RAW converters like ACR or (better) Capture One Pro? Furthermore, does it make really sense to judge this high resolution cameras with sub-optimal lenses? Why not shooting with a Zeiss Otus 55, Sigma 50 Art or Zeiss Apo-Sonnar 135? To my opinion these sensors deliver such outstanding results that you have to work under perfect conditions!
HappyVan: To be honest, I wouldn't depend on the phone for photos.
I would slip the Nikon AW110 into my other pocket. Its footprint is even smaller than my Sony Esperia S. It's rain and freeze proof, and comes with wifi.
You can even take semi-submerged shots of a flood. Of course, it has an optical zoom.
On a budget, there is the Nikon S32 $129.
Willing to carry a chunkier camera? There's the Nikon One cameras with PDAF and able to print a clean 18x12. The J1 kit is available for $249
I have two DSLRs and my Nokia Lumia 1520. If I need image quality, then I will take the D800E. For snapshots my Lumia is most time with me. There is no need for another P&S camera.
HowaboutRAW: No mSD card slot; bad idea, assuming it shoots raw, like the 1520.
Ever uploaded a 20MP RAW file to Skydrive? Not a real fun...