blurredvision

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Dec 28, 2005

Comments

Total: 66, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »

Could the program open D500 RAW files before this update?

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 12:04 UTC as 9th comment | 1 reply
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (789 comments in total)
In reply to:

ephankim: How fast is the AF ?

23 parsecs

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 00:05 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1189 comments in total)
In reply to:

blurredvision: Why exactly is the price increase so dramatic for such small increase in sensor size?

Sorry, I wasn't trying to incite another forum war, it was a serious question. The sensor on this, by my math, is 40% bigger than FF (44x33 vs 36x24). Yes, bigger, but why does it command such a huge price tag? It just confuses me that in a world where smaller equals more expensive (which makes sense), making something 40% larger should be "easier". I mean, digital camera sensors are pretty damn mature at this point. It just feels like a lot of other stuff in photography, where it's expensive just because it can be.

I personally can't tell a difference between these sample photos and the better FF photos in this forum. I'm guessing I'm in the vast, vast majority on this, so I can't fathom why so many would want to spend over $11k on this system when $3k would get you 99.5% of the photo.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 22:57 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1189 comments in total)

Why exactly is the price increase so dramatic for such small increase in sensor size?

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 21:55 UTC as 66th comment | 16 replies
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1189 comments in total)
In reply to:

caravan: On June 23 everything changed.

What's happening tomorrow?

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 21:51 UTC
In reply to:

Autriche78: Doesn't matter to me either way. I enjoy the feel of a real camera in my hands - maybe I'm showing my age here, but that's what I grew up with and that's what I'm going to continue to use, because it's not just about capturing the image for some of us but the whole experience. Holding a FF sensor 24-600 mm f1.2 smartphone "camera" still wouldn't do it for me.

How about a significantly longer lasting battery instead that keeps the phone going for a week? Much more useful.

Camera improvements are an easier selling point and easier to improve than reinventing battery technology to quadruple energy storage.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2016 at 00:01 UTC
In reply to:

cdembrey: Affinity Photo and Affinity Designer are great on a Mac. With a Windoz version in the pipeline. They live on your computer, not in the cloud, and you actually own them—no subscription required!

The Windoz version should work well on a Surface 4.

Oh man, "Windoz". You really showed Microsoft on that one, way to stick it to the multi-billion dollar company!

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2016 at 14:50 UTC
In reply to:

LightCatcherLT: Adobe, please add focus mask in Library mode ;) And stop that b.s. with "update for CC subscribers only". That peaks anger every time I read this and makes me research other alternatives to Lr. I believe I am not alone on this.

My spite is 3 years worth of reading countless whine posts about Adobe's subscription model. Three years of people saying they're going to move on to something else but never do.

I moved to LRCC on my own accord, nobody bent me over...who exactly do you think Adobe forced this upon? I subscribed because it includes Photoshop. I've been on it for a year now, which has cost me $120, whereas buying a standalone LR/PS combo would've cost me at least $650 (historically speaking, of course).

Only photographers will pay exorbitant prices on photography gear and then complain about a $120/year subscription fee for software that can vastly improve their photos.

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2016 at 12:51 UTC

Hey look! Another post about an Adobe update where people complain about the subscription in the comments! I'm still waiting for all the detractors to switch to another product like they promised us they would 3 years ago...

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2016 at 11:32 UTC as 14th comment | 20 replies
In reply to:

LightCatcherLT: Adobe, please add focus mask in Library mode ;) And stop that b.s. with "update for CC subscribers only". That peaks anger every time I read this and makes me research other alternatives to Lr. I believe I am not alone on this.

I hope they do make the next Lightroom CC-only, just to see if all the people who say they'll leave, actually do.

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2016 at 09:53 UTC
In reply to:

Vanitas Photo: Nikons cant get a sharp defined subject when shoothing through gas/heat combo expelled by fire? My (insert other brand) can get it sharp!! And not looking ripple-ish.

Nikon is doomed.

P.S. It is a joke :)

A camera walks into a bar. The bartender asks, "What'll ya have?" The camera says, "Give me a shot."

P.S. Also joking here.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2016 at 16:58 UTC
In reply to:

Photo Pete: There's nothing like viewing your holiday snaps and knowing that sizeable chunks of those memorable views have been completely invented by software
:-)

Technically 100% digital pictures are created by software. If you're pining for the old days, stick with film.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 00:15 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1086 comments in total)
In reply to:

syberman7: Don't like the new comments section design at all - very messy. Please don't change things for change's sake.

@Richard, so what you're telling me is that really not much changed and people are complaining for nothing? Makes my original point. :)

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 22:15 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1086 comments in total)
In reply to:

Prakash Heda: I have Nikon d800 and D610 and just bought Sony A6300 with kit lens to test....

My main concern was autofocus and even on LCD its instant, seeing proper exposure on LED screen or EVF is a big improvement than Nikon....now thinking is it worth replacing 20k worth of Nikon gear?

If you actually use all $20k of that gear, I'm going to guess any mirrorless system you move to will not have proper replacements for it all, either in performance or existence.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 22:11 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1086 comments in total)
In reply to:

Terapixel: Where are the great DX lenses ?

Check Sigma's website for those.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 22:08 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1086 comments in total)
In reply to:

syberman7: Don't like the new comments section design at all - very messy. Please don't change things for change's sake.

"Very very bad UI and UX"....you do realize that it didn't really change that much, right? The like button was moved from the side to the bottom of a comment, you now have the ability to take your like back if you want, and there is now a reply button at the bottom of the comment chain, which makes a lot more sense because that's typically where you'll quit reading (not at the top like before).

The placement of the reply button is negligible and the other two things I mentioned are obviously pros, not cons.

EDIT: Well, I just now noticed the big blue REPLY button at the top, too, so it's not only like before, but they gave an extra reply at the bottom.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 22:07 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1086 comments in total)
In reply to:

syberman7: Don't like the new comments section design at all - very messy. Please don't change things for change's sake.

If there's one thing I've learned about the online photography community is that most have no patience for any change whatsoever. The new comments design is much better than before, nowhere near as clunky as it used to be.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 09:57 UTC
On article Benchmark performance: Nikon D810 in-depth review (255 comments in total)

FINALLY I can make an informed decision on whether or not to buy this camera.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2016 at 23:01 UTC as 56th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

thx1138: The gushing enthusiasm about the high ISO performance is ridiculous. The D500 is barely better than the a6300 or D7200 at 25600 and if those sensors were down-sampled to 21MP the results would be even closer. Nikon has not altered quantum physics and have only barely raised the bar. You certainly would not use ISO 51K or higher which are marketing cr@p. The really good news is that they have not made the mistake they did with the D5 and the sensor has impressive DR and is ISOless, the exact opposite of the D5, which has gone markedly backward. However yet again the D500 is only performing a wee bit better than the D7200 in the DR and ISO'lessness testing.

Leaving aside the sensor the real drawcard of this camera is the AF. And could they have just used the D7200 sensor in the D500 body and would anybody really see the difference in IQ.

You should really get used to it when talking DSLRs. How much better can they get? There is a great deal of diminishing returns in this market. The modern DSLR is such a mature piece of technology, there's really no breakthroughs left to achieve, only minor improvements from model to model.

This is what happened with Adobe products (nothing left to add, so they web subscription), what's happening currently with the iPad/iPhone, what's happening to operating systems (Windows, OSX, iOS, Android, etc).

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 00:51 UTC
In reply to:

bocajrs: I was considering selling my D750 for the D500, but looking at ISO samples, I'm sticking with my D750 as I can shoot HI 2(51200) and get nice images.

@Mikael - At the end of the day, both cameras take pictures and they are the exact same price, so he can absolutely compare them, sensor size be damned.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 00:46 UTC
Total: 66, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »