Lee Jay: Couple comments from Tom Hogarty of Adobe:
"This will not impact your previous standalone version of Lightroom and we will continue to provide upgrades to the perpetual versions of Lightroom."
"This post has no impact on our perpetual commitment and just reassures those customers who have chosen to adopt the membership model going forward."
And, as a reminder:
"Q. Will Lightroom become a subscription only offering after Lightroom 5?
A. Future versions of Lightroom will be made available via traditional perpetual licenses indefinitely."
You did not understand anything...
I guess that Apple realised that the package Aperture + Photoshop cannot compete with LR + Photoshop at $10/month or so.
Mais78: The new Sigma lenses are very good optically and shine in lab tests. But as a owner of a Sigma 35mm f1.4 who went through 3 copies I can tell you that in real life the AF is hit and miss and certainly you cannot trust any focus point that is not the central one.
Scottelly, you don't need a high end lens to understand that AF is not consistent. My low end Tamron 24-70 and Canon 40mm are way more reliable. Also I am definitely not the only one, read this reviewhttp://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-50mm-f-1.4-DG-HSM-Art-Lens.aspx
You are lucky. My experience is consistent with the one of many others. Or probably you dont shoot in focus critical situations.
The new Sigma lenses are very good optically and shine in lab tests. But as a owner of a Sigma 35mm f1.4 who went through 3 copies I can tell you that in real life the AF is hit and miss and certainly you cannot trust any focus point that is not the central one.
MayaTlab0: "One point worth noting here is that the X-E2 doesn't just allow you to select a minimum shutter speed - it forces you to select a single fixed speed, and unlike Nikon's recent SLRs, there's no 'Auto' option that takes the lens's focal length into account."
Oh dear. Why can't they get it right ? Is it so hard to create a few lines of codes to just copy what others are doing ?
He wrote that in quotation marks but i don't see that anyhwhere in the review.
Still don't understand how it works. With my canon 6d you either pick a min shutter speed manually or leave it on Auto, in that case the min shutter speed picked by the camera is 1/focal lenght.You are saying the XE2 has no auto? No big deal, I prefer manual as min shutter speed is also a function of what I intend to take a picture of (eg fast moving object), and the camera obviously does not know.
Where does it say that it forces you to select a fixed speed only??
Inconsistent shot-to-shot AF rings a bell: same issue of the Sigma 35mm f1.4 (I owned 3 copies).
mgblack74: I've had this lens for almost a year now. I use it on a D3s and D800 were it is excellent on both. I have used Nikon's version and IQ is very hard to tell apart. The Tamron's AF is very quick, but unlike the Nikon version it seems to think for a split second but then nails AF. It is indeed curious and a shame that between 1/40 and 1/80 the VC can't control the mirror slap frequency. It's at those "borderline" shutter speeds that one most needs VC. Say you're out of breath or shivering and normal techniques to stop camera shake arent working, VC is great. One way around it is to switch the camera to Q mode. Mirror slap is less apparent. I have primes from 35 to 135 and only two zooms; 14-24 & Tamron's 24-70. VC for video on the D800 is excellent. Stable shots hand held.
DPReview explanation:"Slightly less-fast autofocus than Canon or Nikon equivalents (but far from slow)"
Anything but slow, you must have a bad copy
Nukunukoo: Optically, the Tamron works perfectly on my D7100. No problem at corners but its focusing's too slow for events shooting and even for moderate action scenarios. Quite a shame really, considering its IQ. And as far as portraiture, architectural and landscape is concerned, it's as close to perfect. The zoom ring is a bit on the stiff side but it's not something I would not get used to.
I would rather have less-than-perfect IS than slow focusing any day (it's a fast lens after all). Too bad, I liked the weight and feel but after the loaner, I'ved decided not to buy it. But only mainly because my current budget won't justify that one compromise.
Curious. we all agree that AF is slowER than Canon II, but how can you call it slow?? I have the Canon fit and it is very fast, in line with what reviews say.
dylanbarnhart: While technically the Tamron is excellent as tested here, real world problems spoil this (and other third party) lenses. Despite costing more and not having IS, the Canon 24-70 gets better real-world usage review than the Tamron. The Canon gets 4.8 stars on both B&H and Amazon, while the Tamron gets 4.3 on both. It's not a coincidence that the two websites agree on the same rating. The problems are real and the statistics prove it.
As a long time Tamron and Sigma user, I applaud Tamron for great improvements over optics, VC and ultra sonic focus. However there are 2 areas that still make this lens inferior to name brand: focus reliability and quality control. Tamron cannot be taken seriously in the professional market until they can get these problems figured out.
do you own one? I never had any problem with AF and shoot 5000 pictures
gajuambi: all the 2 copies that i got from tamron had a compatibility issue with canon 650d (t4i) and slow focus issue. got my money back and bought a canon 24-105...never going for tamron again
The first copies of the Tamron had well documented compatibility issues with 6D and 650D. When buying make sure the serial number is 02xxxx or higher.Had to change my 007xxx with a 023xxx. This lens is great value for money, the Canon costs twice as much and you only get fractional improvements.
Dédéjr: Politically correct xenophobic imagery wins again i see, rock on huh!
what's xenophobic in that image??
Mais78: Would love to see the RAW of the (nice) winning photo. Heavily post processed, looks cartoon-like.
@photo nuts you are just a couple of clicks away, you can see my dpreview gallery. By the way i am an amateur, dont feel that you need to be a pro to judge a pro.
" The image was taken with an EOS 5D Mark III DSLR at a focal length of 16mm; the exposure was 1/800sec at f/5, ISO 400"
To start with, the lighting conditions must have been very different from what the final processed picture suggets.
Would love to see the RAW of the (nice) winning photo. Heavily post processed, looks cartoon-like.
Crazy, got an almost idential one! http://g1.img-dpreview.com/0E780B0FDB52408183913A15C9036513.jpgBeautiful place