Carlos Loff: Bring the 7D Mark II so Nikon can launch the D400 - And cut the rest of the crap or I will buy the K-3 and change to Pentax
" . . . or I will buy the K-3 and change to Pentax"
Try it. You may like it.
Wow. It looks like either customers have taken them to task and they're desperate, or it's long term planning to hook even more subscriptions before significantly raising the prices. I suspect the latter.
Michael de Ruijter: Is that seriously the hood ? ? ?
It can't be . . .
Flare is one thing, but my understanding is that cutting out any stray light at all will improve the image quality in terms of contrast. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Yeah, but . . . damn! That hood is nothing more than a step-up ring.
Carlos Loff: I m a Nikon Lover but since I lost my D200 to the ocean waves, I m just getting tired of waiting for the Nikon D400. Im seriously considering the purchase of a Pentax K-3 because reading carefully all the specs it just suits my best dreams for such a selling price
Now this lens is one more reason to keep thinking about, why not a Pentax ?
It would be a very nice lens to start, suitable for some landscape and portrait near the sea or in light rainy days
Oh . . . it might be a helluva lot better than you think right now. The Limited series has that tendency.
Karl Summers: What's with the red ring? We supposed to think it's a Canon L?
Buying this lens for one's Canon body will at least give meaning to owning the Canon . . .
Ricoh is bringing it to the table!
Let's see some images.
Is that seriously the hood ? ? ?
It's awesome, but it's not three grand awesome...
I love technology!
harry cannoli: Not for me. I did the Adobe upgrade thing,every time I upgraded a body I required the latest and greatest just to get ACR. First CS, then CS2.
Adobe can kiss my a$$. I'll stick with PS7. If I need to work with 16 bit layers, I'll fire up CS. Third party RAW converters have served me well, and will continue to do so in the future.
$120 a year, forever? I don't think so. You guys can do what you want.
I don't think it will be $120 a year for very long at all.
Perhaps the original, somewhat steep, pricing kept enough users away to awaken a realization?
Does this mean we get lured at a super-low price and then in a year or so (whatever the bean counters decree) we get stung with a series of steep price hikes? Adobe have shown that you just can't place any trust or faith in them at all unless you're a shareholder.
At the end of the day - for me at least - it will take some doing on my part for CS6 to limit me. As such I will still not be buying, nor do I buy into the philosophy.
role_of_72: OK, at least now I know I still don't understand 'art'.. :D
Let me offer some assistance if I can...
Art is opinion.
Michael de Ruijter: The title is misleading. It should read "50 Opinions I have formed about mobile photography."
These are not lessons or facts, they are opinions.
Fair enough. And don't get me wrong, I agree with several of your thoughts.
The title is misleading. It should read "50 Opinions I have formed about mobile photography."
It's a Smurfcam!
It looks great.
samhain: I like the colors. But I'd prefer Pentax put their R&D and design money where it counts- into a FF model and not in Marc Newson's pocket.
Change the plastic dye from yellow to blue.
Wow, that was a fast bit of R&D. It just cost me millions in time to think of that.
Michael de Ruijter: What are we supposed to do? Grab a fistful of dollars and toss it away?
My comment is only a reaction to this ad campaign: What is our response to the ad campaign supposed to be? Do we stop morally supporting because it's not $$$? Reminds me of the beggars Downtown - they want $ for coffee, but they get aggressive and angry when you buy them a coffee.
I have chosen three charities/foundations/associations/causes that I donate to and only to those three.
What are we supposed to do? Grab a fistful of dollars and toss it away?
Option 1: Adobe gets my $, Adobe keeps its software.Option 2: I keep my $, Adobe keeps its software.
I'm all for Option 2.