Cameron R Hood: I'll no longer be supporting Adobe in every way I possibly can. Bye bye. And I paid for the full version of the software, Riveredge. What if you occasionally need Illustrator and inDesign, like I do, two or three times a year? Are you into paying $50.00 a month for software you use rarely? Unless they let us rent by the month, I'll be looking elsewhere.
All power to you then. I wouldn't want to pay into this scheme for 30 years. That's a lot of money.
It's not all bad, it's just one more step to convert it into a DNG and editing it in the last version here.
Pity, I like ACR. Have to look for something else now.
Edgar_in_Indy: Too bad more camera makes don't do like Pentax, and allow you to shoot RAW in DNG format, instead of a propriety/arbitrary format.
I hope this update supports the Panasonic GX8!
Yeah, we have to petition them to make it into DNGs.
Brian Alpert: As a CS6 user, I would be perfectly willing to pay for an ACR update. I primarily use Lightroom for raw processing & CS6 for when I need it. There are many times though that I don't want to bother with Lightroom's catalog, and just use CS6 with ACR. I'd like to have my options open and I'm willing to pay for ACR updates.
Hoping people will crack the ACR updates. LOL
For those who think it's just coffees.
Think about students and hobbyists & retirees who really don't want to pay into it for a lifetime.
Reasons to get this- VR
A 0.7 stop? improvement from the older 16-85 f3.5-5.6.
More useful range than 17-55 f2.8 but loses on the variable aperture. No VR.Price-about the same for a 2nd hand.
The other 18-70 18-55 are IMO not quite in the same quality range.
Feel free to chip in your thoughts.
Stanchung: Not particularly contrasty is it? :/
It does look overcast. +20 contrast overall needed in PS for berries and flowers.
Not particularly contrasty is it? :/
SETI: Heh, green skintones again =)
duh, comparing a warm scene and cool one, right.
nathantw: Actually looks good. Thanks for the samples. One tip, though, 85mm is good for closeup portraits and the 24mm isn't.
http://framesstudio.com/blog/ A photographer I like. Whole bunch of wideangles with nice bokeh in them. Something a 24-35 would be very good at I suspect.
There's also nice mid tele's in there.
It makes the whole album look more 'together' IMO. Every photo has a bit of bokeh.
Doesn't know how to use f1.4 f2 wideangles but doubles down on ignorance. smh.
Der Steppenwolf: Great lens for documentary photographers, journalists, street shooters and real estate people. Sigma does it again, thinks outside of the box and produces some great lenses.
real estate people wouldn't buy this lens. haha
vFunct: Terrible Bokeh. If I wanted to make a beautiful shot, I wouldn't use this lens. Sorry.
:/, I think the bokeh is fine. That leaves background is just too busy with too many fine detail for a 24mm to handle properly.
If you notice there is no harsh colour rings on the bokeh. This to me is considered good bokeh.
Joed700: Okay, this lens is heavier and longer than my 24-70mm f2.8, and it covers only up to 35mm instead of 70mm, not to mention it's not weather sealed. The photos showed no advantage in terms of flare compared to mine. What was Sigma thinking?
I have a 15-30 f2.8 as essential backup for the wide.
Not flush enough to get a Nikon f1.4 but the Sigma 24 f1.4 looks tempting.
The biggest issue is the 24 isn't a lens you can leave on the camera for long periods even if you bring 2 cameras for an event. A 24-35 potentially could be left on the whole time while using an 85 on the other.
bgbs: The skin tones are awful, is it the camera or the lens?
There's more pop in colour from this 5DSR. I would tone the skin down a bit but that's just a personal thing. Every one has their favourite setting.
Yeah once you've shot at 24 f1.4. The key is to keep the subject close to the middle to minimise overly distorted face.
Looks very sharp full open @f2 but quite a bit of vignetting full open at 24mm.
Marty4650: The most shocking part of this story is that no one on DPR's editorial staff seems to be aware that VERY similar products are available for one tenth the price.
Hardly an exciting or interesting news story, is it?
Looks neat folded up but limited use really.
Marty4650: The should have sent a police artist.
One of those guys who draws a suspect based on the description from the victims.
I imagined the editor sending his mom to the concert and asking her to recollect to the office sketch artist.
Thanks for the laugh!
jagge: It seems its not very sharp at 0,95 -> 2.8 which makes this sense completely irrelevant for anything, especially with the lack of AF and especially at this price.
Ohhh the amount of f 5.0 pictures from this baby in the review strongly puzzles me. A lens like this is bought for the 0.95 what it can do above f 3.5 is totally irrelevant.
Sharpness is not as critical in certain video techniques. Things/people can move in and out of focus center to the edges as a technique itself.
It has a little swirly bokeh going on and that I suspect is what some people like about this lens. I certainly do except I don't own an MFT camera.