geoglyphs: 12 is de Haus des Sports on the Stalinallee, now called Karl-Marxallee:http://www.berlinermaueronline.de/berlin-fotos/berlin-1950/berlin-1950-008.htm
Worth going through that whole slideshow by the way.
Yes, the gallery you mention is worth to go through. Thanks for information.
InTheMist: Nice! I think this one is better than the first set.
Hello,depending of what you "wish to see", the two collections doesn't show the same situations and not the same time. Second part was clearly reconstruction, the first just ruins and disaster. For people who lived there during these years, the meaning is not the same of course. Actually I like both.
MPA1: But are they sharp in the corners?
Depending of what we are able to see, particularly in the corners. You likely also need the right glasses..?
Thanks a lot for these old pictures.. I can remember some of places you've shown here. The "Potzdamer Platz" was at this moment a really great "desert" just with some big stones laying here and there. As far as you could see with your eyes, you couldn't see a standing building ! As a little child discovering this kind of landscape, some years before these good pictures were taken, is absolutely unforgettable ! If you return just now to same place, there will be a big surprise of course.. just some "little changes".
E3BD38BCFE804D08BAF6E6775FF4C0F6: Just a hobbyist, I bought the 24-70 f2.8L ii usm abt a yr ago happy with the overall performance but man oh man the 70-200 ii is usm just acquired last wk was beyond my expectations! At 70mm the later lens is certainly way better! Honestly, both lenses are pricy hope canon could lower their overall pricing to enable more users to join the rank of satisfied customers.
Yes this 70-200/2.8 II is amazing too and a little bit better at 70mm as the 24-70. You're right. BUT : until now no lens provider was able to offer such a lens with best results on both sides, 24 and 70 mm. Nikon has same results and is additionally under quality of the Canon offer and not cheaper !
Miguel Rodríguez: I've just got my new 24-70 f2.8L II USM and so far looks incredible, performs much better than my 17-40 and Siggy 35 f1.4 @f4. It is comparable to my 70-200 f2.8 at 70mm. So it is an impressive piece of glass. I upgraded from my 24-105 after more than a year hesitating to do it, the reason is the 24-105 at the end of the day was not a lens I trusted 100% of the time, in my experience sometimes I managed to get good results, something not so good.
I agree, this lens is absolute amazing and you'll see pictures quality differences taken with this lens or another one. They will not be identical even at first look. Now that price had dropped with some regular promotions, it's worth. I don't have any trouble with my 24-105 but of course clearly below the quality of this 24-70/2.8 II which was marked by a wellknown photo magazine in France as "the best 24-70" ever seen among all lens providers. At 50mm the only which could compete is the new Sigma 50/f1.4 ART (it's a prime at 900 €) !
Photomonkey: Clearly this means that Canon has been shamed by the posters at DPR and elsewhere complaining about their old sensors, high prices and lack of IS in the 24-70 2.8LII.Having thus been shamed they are liquidating their lens line and concentrating only on copiers.Fire sale on bodies shortly.I am certain of this because I understand the industry perfectly from my many hours reading on the internet of things.
Really ? Sure ? Internet reading..? Photography is experienced on field with your gear, certainly not on Internet.
But good reading !
Steve Parkin: There is so much ridiculous fighting and bickering over cameras. Its hard to believe. I'm still shooting with a 5D Mark II/7D and the last generation 500mm F4 L IS lens. Its great that they reduced the pric on the new ones, but the last round of tech that I bought 5....8....10 years ago is still so freakin' good that I don't really see a need for better. Unless you're just starving to spend more money on new tech, as a Canon shooter, I'm completely fine with not having to shell out huge amounts of money every three years to get something fantastically better than what I have. Mirrorless and iPhones might be the big thing right now, but they aren't replacing my 5D2. Nor does any of that tech provide an opportunity to attach a lens anywhere near as epic as a 500mm F4 L IS to it. Life is too short and the existing gear is far too good to sit around bemoaning a lack of something better. Go make some great photographs.
You're completely right. Changing all time, if you look for the last "Best" product will produce a big money drop in your wallet and if you listen to the huge amount of people recommanding this or this product (of course, the last, the best aso..) you'll perhaps also change your camera provider for 1 or 2 years. Until another takes the first place. An unending game for frustrated people. Nothing to do with photography of course..
chiane: Anyone think forum members read a little to much into everything?
Absolutely YES !Time spent to read and comment is not time spent for photography. Happy medium should be mandatory.
bajanexile: Canon's big problem is not their range of lenses but their lack of innovation when it comes to Camera Bodies/Sensors. I was a Canon System user since 1981, but have left the fold this year. I still own a number of EF Fit lenses but now use them on a different body with an adapter. As a former Canon user, I feel that they have pretty much abandoned their Enthusiast/Semi-Pro market for Video. I do not shoot video. I could see no real advantage in moving from my Canon EOS 5D Mk.II to the Mk.III. IMHO the Mk. III is overpriced. Canon are about two generations behind the FF and APS-C cameras equipped with Sony Sensors.
At least you should have to try the 5DMkIII, very near from overall features from Nikon 800E/810 dispite less pixels (but pixels does not all in photography ?!). I've sold my 800E to buy a 5DMkIII which respond to my requirements and fullfill much more the things I'm waiting from a DSLR. Video is top on 5D, not at all on D800/E. Sensor alone doesn't make such a huge difference on final photo rendering. It also depend what you're looking for : pixel count and resolution, distortion, color accuracy aso.. Working with many other DSLR I've switched to Canon because overall features from camera is ok and lens are much more better as the corresponding from other providers, even from Nikon (except the highest pro lens over 10 k$ where offers are similar).PS @Photomonkey : the 24-70/2.8 II L with no IS ? I guess it's a joke !? Weight ? Price ? My god..! Buy a Tamron if necessary.
Ramjager: A stronger opponent with the 5DMk3 in terms of Autofocus?You mean the Nikon AF system works this time or is it still sharp on the right soft on the left?Funny how in the DPR D800 review no mention was made of the poor AF and QC issues which plagued the D800 bodies.How many people went through multiple bodies to get one good one that had an AF system half as good as Canons...lots.Yet hey it had 36MP its the king.Your kidding yourseld DPR thinking some actually read and take your reviews seriously until you start reviewing properly and thoroughly.But hey its got 36.3 MP and made by Nikon it must be good..right?
@DaveE1 : so why leave a comment on a forum, forum where we don't necessarily have same opinion ? If you don't like, don't write or critisize other opinions, furthermore without any real and understandable argument. Thanks for your effort..
@DaveE1 : "If people love their Canon badges that much, wouldn't they be happier in the Canon sections of the site? Canon articles and forums are aplenty, so knock yourselves out" : they are !NB : some can have both experiences..
We all have different opinions about our gear.. but you, most probably don't like or admit it ?
@Ramjager : yes, that's one of the main reason why I switched from Nikon D800E to Canon with a 5D MkIII, with satisfaction, lenses ok, autofocus fine, silent aso.. Just compare, on field and real photo conditions, the Nikon 24-70/2.8 AFS with the Canon 24-70/2.8L II ! Just a reminder : photos are recorded out of a sensor, but light go through the lens ! Second point is often forgotten ? Mpix changes nothing here..
Have a look on Thom Hogan's web page where his last comments concerning Aperture explains very clearly that with new ios8, photography "seen from Apple side" will be managed in a completely different way. This way has nothing to do of course, with the usual way used by Pros and Experts.. This is iclouded photography and I bet this will only adress approx. 5% of Pro's need. You'll also notice that the young children shown on some screens illustrating the forcoming ios8 capabilities make me concluding that this new photo application from Apple is mainly built for FAMILY.
TimT999: I'm a bit disappointed that Apple took so long to admit that it was moving all its resources over to their Photo app, but I'm not too surprised. Aperture 3 came out ages ago and it didn't make sense for them to have parallel development of a consumer and pro photo app. That said, I've always preferred the Aperture approach to usability.
Apple has always tried to keep focused on their core strengths rather than spread resources too thin. That's why you have only a handful of Apple phone choices rather than the 40-odd that Samsung sells.
I just hope that Adobe doesn't move Lightroom users over to the monthly rental model they use for Photoshop.
Adobe gave information that LR will be an available "standalone" application forever. Question is : could we believe that ?
NB : ther're also other applications than those from Adobe on market ! C1, DxO aso..
Spectro: Nikon will discontinue support soon for capture NX-2 which is a bummer. Really there are few raw editors left, there are plenty of raw converters. Adobe gets richer with the cloud, nice timing.
With a simple "Photography bundle" in CC offer, Adobe get until now, nomore money than before with upgrading PS and LR every 18 months.. Tomorow ? Another story of course..!
MiraShootsNikon: Back in 2007 or so, I decided to switchup my Bridge-Photoshop workflow to leverage one of the newer cataloging-converter apps. I worked with Lightroom and Aperture extensively for the free month both offered, and ultimately I liked Aperture better.
But I chose Lightroom.
Because even even in 2007, Apple had a terrible reputation for cultivating pro markets and then losing interest in them. Hypercard, anyone? Shake? I love their computers and their products, but Apple likes to use professionals as advertising halos--it's never really been about really serving professional markets. It's great to trot out Sara French to talk about how great Apple products are for photography, but when it comes to actually following a niche market? Not so glamorous or profitable.
I agree, I think Apple is far away from photography market (expert or Pro) and will be more involved in cloud applications which should, without any doubt, bring much more money than an application sold for some $$. Furthermore the gap between Aperture and products like LR, C1, DxO.. is so big that if Apple would have to reach this level, a huge R&D task, so investment too, would be necessary. Aperture is "OUT" since a long time and in Apple's marketing strategy Aperture is not a "mass market target". I even wonder Final Cut is updated just now..Finally I'm not surprised with current decision concerning Aperture.
steelhead3: If Canon can't produce good sensors, they will give you an small upgrade on their software to keep the troops happy.
@Peter Bendheim : I had both Nikon D800E and Canon 5D MkIII and agree with the fact that there's NO problem with Canon sensors. Many people are certainly more concerned with their equipment, waiting for the "perfect thing" instead of spending time outside to take pictures. I can read, here and there, noise is bad.. dynamic range is not enough.. resolution is too low, aso.. I think we are spoilt children ?
hotdog321: I'm hoping DPP will improve its clunky interface enough that I can eventually stop using my standalone CS6 before it becomes too outdated. I won't use Adobe Cloud.
@Joe : I can understand your opinion but if you won't spend more than two minutes with DPP, you don't have a real opportunity to KNOW about this soft. Of course CS6/5 is not to be compared with DPP (same story with Nikon's Capture NX).. but to develop a RAW and just print it, you don't absolutely need PS. PS is a great application, much more complicate as soon as you use masks and layers.. and at a certain price.. DPP is simpler and cost nothing !
MisoL: When we can expect Linux version? Canon, please wake up! The only RAW processor choice, Linux users have is Corel AftershotPro and it takes them many months to support new cameras (lost sales for you in Linux users). Free software like Darktable and RawTherapee is faster in supporting new cameras, but it's usability is not as mature yet.
The answer for your question is IN your question : Linux !! How much users in photography area ? A lot of them use PS too.. which don't exist in Linux world. Companies have to develop for windows and OS-X OS and that represents already a huge work to make it right.. Linux : good, but not suited, until now, for photography. This dispite many comments from Linux users to promote Gimp and other applications.. Like JackM : get real.