MikeFairbanks: My previous post is tongue-in-cheek, but the event is very real.
Adobe said the Creative Cloud is a year-long committment. But since I signed up via live chat with an Adobe rep, I believe I was mislead. I even appealed and was denied through the appeal process.
To require a year-long committment shows me that they don't have enough confidence in their product that you'll want to stay with them.
I'll continue buying stand-alone software in the future. I don't want a subscription-based service, especially one that locks you in for a set amount of time. That's just desperation, in my opinion.
Plus, all I really want is Photoshop Elements. I use Canon's FREE software for my raw files (it's almost as good as Lightroom and just as fast).
Yes, DPP is better and faster as LR4/5.. (RAW), at zero cost. Of course LR do more in other aspects.C1 too is much more better than LR and do the same !
RudivanS: How does it compare to DxO Optics Pro 8 re. image quality rendering?
@Rudivan5 : you're right, color rendering of DxO and white balance is often a question to discuss about. Try to crop a picture and then compare with previous state just by clicking on image..! The manner they remove dust spots should be changed too : in some cases you don't see them on original non processed image but only on adjusted/modified image. But you'll have to remove them from initial image. Good luck !
Another important point to mention, for some users who own several PC's : license with DxO is installed almost forever on a specific computer. When reinstalling or buying a new system you've to contact service to transfer license. With C1 you do it yourself on PhaseOne site.. the best license management available !So you can't switch from one computer to another quickly, what is possible with C1.
ZeevK: I do not understand why the need to release new s/w version each time support added for a new camera? Why not use DLL or a plug-inn? I am really glad C1 now supports "300 different camera models" 298 of which I will never need... And it's not only C1 but also all the rest...
If you have bug-fix - release it as a bug-fix, if the u/g is only support for a camera I do not use - don't bother me..
yes they add new camera support.. BUT the main thing is possibility (new but still beta version) of importing LR catalogs under windows OS ! Previous release had already this feature under OS X (also beta).Sure that C1 is now competing with LR and attacking head-on.NB : DxO and Adobe too support hundreds of lens you probably will never use : a common thing ? So what ?
DxO vs C1 : DxO is unbeatable concerning lens correction but image rendering is, IMHO, far from the one you can achieve with C1. C1 is also easier and faster to use, DxO (Pro version !) is furnished with a huge amount of corrections and the way they process photos are not the same at all as C1 do. DxO keep with devotion since a long time some curious "behaviours" which are no so fine.C1 is more competing with LR, both work with catalog but C1 also handle simple photo directories. I'm not sure that one can tell "this soft or this one is the best..", it's useful to try before you decide. Easy because all these softs can be downloaded and tried !From my point of view and for my use, C1 is a very very good solution with which you can do all your workflow process and get Pro results. Price ? Not cheap for the Pro version but it's worth, really !!
Marcin 3M: Any news about CaptureOne competitive upgrade from LR?
@Marcin 3M : Phase One offer now a lower price for their software (-20% C1 Pro and 50% for C1 Express, upgrades and full version !). Fine, C1 is also better than LR, IMHO.
Cipher: To those sticking with LR4, what will happen when Adobe releases updates to LR5 that enable it to handle RAW files from new cameras?
@Cipher & @JayEm Photos : ok, LR5 upgrade is not so much expensive.. but C1 (now with lower prices !!) is in most areas much more better than LR. Rendering is obviously better and I have to do less adjustments to get what I want. Why to stay with a company which is trying to trap customers within their system ? DNG is already an abortive project, probably used by people who have no access to their image format with a non upgraded LR. Time will tell...
Pythagoras: off topic, but... why do CF cards still exist?
@Josh152 :Sorry, but your comments are wrong.. on Sandisk page, the related speed are "read speed" NOT write speed..! Have a look on Rob Galbraith's page who has seriously compared almost all wellknown CF and SD cards.Size of CF cards : do you shoot sometimes in winter in hard conditions and have to change your memory card, eventually with gloves ? Likely not. CF is very big compared to additional battery, lens, filter aso..that you normaly have in your bag ? It's a joke no ?I use CF since 2003 and had never any trouble with connection although pins are supposedly not ideal, but they're well protected.The main reason why CF are faster than SD is the fact that CF has its circuit driver IN the card unlike SD cards which are driven from DSLR directly, thus processor load during shooting is higher with this card. This certainly also explain the significant price difference..I use both SD and CF cards on a D800, write CF speed from Lexar and Sandisk are far above best available SD card.
marshim: Why wouldn't I get the 70-200 F2.8 + the TC 20 for less than 2700???Who is going to be there target consumer for this lens?It's not a PRO lens (at least the predecessor wasn't), so would prosumer pay this much....
I too own the 70-200 f2.8 VRII with TC2 III and combination works fine, indeed with some quality loss due to the TC.. but it will be interesting to see if this new 80-400 VRII is as good as one could imagine/hope by reading specs ? Price is very high, question is finally : is it justified regarding the supposed obtained quality (same quality as the 70-200/f2.8 VRII) ? Specially in Europe where price in $ is translated without any conversion in €..!! Oups.
doctorbza: i wanna know which photographers are going to let the body dictate the lens based on an internet score.
"well, i really wanted to shoot architecture; but dxo said the 400mm performed best so i shoot birds now."
@doctorbza : your answer is really very funny (architecture/birds) and interesting ! I've since a long time the curious impression that DxO stress mainly on lens corrections, details, resolution and other physical wonderful properties, which are without any doubt, important but not often relevant for the overall real photo quality.. as long as you look at all aspects of a "good photography" ? Many people are now looking at the very best performance of their equipment, but thus sometimes (?) totally forget other important photography factors. This is of course only a personal standpoint !
Burbclaver: Who is the target market for this lens? What do they shoot with it? This isn't a sarcastic remark, I am just interested.
Same for me.. I don't know, except new users who doesn't have any 85, 70-200, 300mm aso.., who will buy this lens ? At this huge price ?! But it must be of course related to the "supposed" lens quality..? A comparison with 70-200 VRII + 2x III (or 1.7) teleconverter will be a good indication.
No, no and no.. this 4.4RC is a pity. Have made some tests and compared to 4.3 release : ok, some little improvment in color area, actually not always visible, BUT what's sure is that images are becoming much more smoother and a little detail enhancement with sharpening slider is not the right answer (imho). Have a look on PhotoNinja and you'll see the huge gap of image quality..! I've removed this pityfull 4.4RC and replaced with the "good old 4.3". Ok, it's not perfect but it hasn't this blurred rendering, completely unnatural, which is finally really disturbing.
I don't really know if this question has any sense..? Of course there will be a winner among the different cameras of this list. But I think, like many other users, that the different uses and domains of photography where the proposed cameras could play are in fact so different that a clear answer isn't relevant. "The best camera" is the one suited to YOUR PERSONAL photographic use and isn't probably the one choosen by your neigbour ? How to compare, let's say just as an example, a Panasonic Lumix with a Canon 5D MkIII ? Same users and same use (except they both just take pictures) ? I don't think so..
Another difficulty to make a fair choice will be : "who know all these cameras, enough to make a honnest choice..?". Sorry, but I haven't used more than 3 cameras from this list and I only know one good enough, the mine.
But ok, all these cameras are probably oustanding. Phew !!
Bad story.. I've never seen a "happy end" in a purchase of a little (even and particularly a good company, there are a lot of such examples !) by a big one : leaders, thinking heads leave the boat and the whole story ends with disappointed users. Google was never interested in Pro imaging products and live in another business area, will this change now ? I bet it will not. And yes the short and sad comment on Nik site shows the future of the company ?Nikon too, with their NX2 have now a real problem.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review