ssh33: Capitalism? I love capitalism! Capitalism is the the right to private property, the right to own. Adobe wants to take that right away from me. I can't own the tools I use, I can't even open my content that I spent countless hours on if I stop paying Adobe. In essence I don't own the fruits of my labor. Really?
What I CAN do is embrace the competition.
Here is a CONSTRUCTIVE suggestion: after a year of payments I own what I paid for - if I stop paying, you stop the updates. Fair?
Maybe you have not understood the meaning of Capitalism.
Capitalism is not the right to private propety, that is recognised by all but the most perverse and/or extreme instances of communism.
Capitalism is like a game of Monopoly, if I own all the stations then you cannot take a train without paying me rent.
Likewise Adobe, being in a dominant market position, can do whatever they feel is most advantagous to them. And they may earn as much money as they can doing it, irrespective of their costs.
Anti trust exits to stop full monopolies, but all that means is that competitors exists. Clever corporations can ensure that there are 'competitors' but they are effectively not competitive ;-)
They most straightforward technique, and difficult to legislate against, is simply offering awesome career prospects and salaries for outstanding key players in competitor companies.
OttoVonChriek: I think if I were professional this would not bother me at all.
As a hobbyist I do not like the idea. It is obliging you to pay continuously. Most hobyist have a limited and possibily quite variable budget, They would normally decide wether they would prefer to spend thier money on a PS ugrade or a new lens.
Additionaly, the time spent on hobbies can vary. I have been through periods when my photography has been limited to family events and such. And hobbies may suffer from force maggiore...imagine a family member is seriously ill, you have little time for hobbies and maybe things are tight financially.
OK, you 'suspend' your subscription, but that means you can't do anything at all with your files until you resubscribe for at least a month.
This seems a poor deal for many, if not most, hobbyists.
On the other hand, I am not a PS user...but I have been ripped of **twice** by Corel, so maybe hobbyists cannot get a better deal esewhere.
1) I purchased a new camera and needed to upgrade to get the RAW support. Days later a new version was released. I wondered wether I was eligable for a few upgrade. No reply to emails requests (normal fo Corel). Eventually phoned up, nobody was available because in sales conference. Two more dud calls. Finally, a response...YES, you can get a free upgrade up to one month. Catch, you had to request it within a month....and 1 month had just passed (after being fobbed off by the same person on the phone for a couple of weeks).
2) I also used Bibble, I was pleased when Corel aquired them....maybe the two would be integrated. Alas no. About 3 months after the merger computer went titsup. I had original install package, licensing and billing info on backup storage, but I could not activate the new install because the Bibble site had been frozen and just pointed to the After shot site. But Corel took no interest in the problem, they said I should go to the Bibble site...loop.
I think if I were professional this would not bother me at all.
I would of thought that uncompressed video streams would be of interest to professional video production. Such situations would certainly call for seperate audio mixing and recording.
It's difficult to imagine the situation where you want top quality video but are content with the compromises that a DSLR body would inevitably offer.
munro harrap: In practice it is very limited because there is no VR. A long lens for wide-angle use is always bad. You forget that length too easily. The 24-70 Canon and Nikon lenses for full-frame rack out to their longest length at their widest setting- as do the 28-85 Nikkor and other older designs, and this means you are HERE using in effect a non-stabilized 70-200 SIZE glass to achieve 27-55mm effect-your in-stability is increased .Regardless of its speed that you cannot use most of the time, that is an extraordinarily long barrel for a 27-55mm lens- a zoom length of precious little use anyway!!
Wait till they IS it!!
When people talk about needing VR for long lenses I always thought they were talking about the focal length, not the physical length of the barrel.
In my ignorance, I thought things became critical with telephoto because a small movement of the camera means a large movement at the subject end!
I must of been confused, allthougth barrel length does not seem to bother me, I place my left hand under the lens.
This is good photography.
This is bad photojournalism.
Peter Heckert2: It is to consider, light does not come in from an recticular angle as shown in the advertisement images above.It comes from all angles with bright lenses and if aperture or focal length (zoom factor) changes, the angles will change. So it must be much more complicated and sophisticated, if this should be an universal sensor for ILS cameras.
I suspect it is for webcams and cellphones only.
Four thirds standards require telecentric lenses
What an excellent idea. And like all the best ideas, so incredibly simple!
I suspect the reason we are seeing this approach being applied first on four thirds is because it is easier to do with highly telecentric optics which characterise four thirds systems.
Enougth of this romantiscism.
Online shops, and most discount outlets, don't offer good advice, are not staffed by photographers, do not let you try things out, and if things don't work it's a nightmare.
Small shops are exactly the opposite, and the prices are not much higher either. But people do not buy from them.
I wonder how many romantics in this thread actually purchase from local stores by preference?
nonomad: Sadly not many of the comments here are from people who are old enough to remember Jessops when it was a family owned business with a a lot less stores than of late I shopped there through the70s 80s.They had great stock knowledgable staff and virtually anything in stock a photographer could possibly need, the problem started when they sold out and the bean counters moved in , the chain expanded at a great rate and became just another high st conglomerate with little of the range previously offered, only recently has there been a change to try and revive (to a degree) what the old Jessops was and all to late, the stores as of now will sadly not be missed.
Hmmm, I am old enougth to remember Jessop's in the 70's, but at that time they just had the one shop...emporium would perhaps have described it better...in London Road.
SirSeth: I'm interested in touching/seeing the Surface RT and Pro in person and hearing opinions from users of both Surface and iPad. However, using an Asus Netbook with alike specs as a bar is not a convincing "debunking" for me. There's more to viewing clarity than specs (even if it were Asus making the screen for the Surface).
Of course the price of the Surface is also of keen interest. An i5, USB3.0, and the ability to use LR and PS on Surface is pretty attractive--so practical performance of the displays is more important than specs to me at this point.
"... the ability to use LR and PS on Surface is pretty attractive-...."
Is that possible? I thought it only ran RT apps from the RT app store?
nixda: Here are two things I'd like to see in a camera that haven't been mentioned before:
1. Square sensor. The image circle is a, um, circle, so why tossing out valuable sensor real estate? Aspect ratios can be selected via the menu or in post-processing, if desired. Also, one wouldn't have to struggle with landscape vs. portrait orientation and all that brings with it when it comes to holding a camera or mounting it to tripod heads.
2. The edges of the bottom plate should be shaped to be compatible with the Arca-Swiss standard.
Liquidsquid wrote:"Hexagon would make more sense....."
Get's my vote as the best point made here yet!
rondhamalam: Do we really need FF ?FF is coming from Film era. A bulky shape derived by the standard set of lenses that difficult to move away from. But eventually smaller camera will be the niche market.
DOF and everything else can be delivered from smaller cameras. Sony and Olly etc are leading the way toward miniaturization since Sony's Walkman time, and the concept continues.
So do we still need FF ?
This was certainly the theory, mirrorless cameras were supposed to be able to offer wide apertures at shortter focal lengths and so equalize the DOF difference.
OTOH I still shoot with 35m B&W film, and despite taking farfewer shots, many of my favourite shots are taken with the 35mm as opposed to the APS-C DSLR.
Well I would like to think about realistic features:
1) Interchangable sensors...sensors mounted on a small panel which fixes into the back of the camera so that it can be switched for a different type, as well as making cleaning easier.
2) Good quality EVF's mounted on the top left edge of the camera, the EVF's also allow a continuous overlay of the histogram, as well as the possibility to review and doi anything else you would otherwise do on the LCD.
3) Less fancy electronics in camera, built in WiFi to supplied Android/iPhone app designed to seamlessly integrate with the camera for more advanced features.
I would note that as the battery and the sensor or two of the most expensive items in a mirrorless camera body, it would be feasable to supply fixed lens/camera combinations without sensors and batteries.
OttoVonChriek: It will be great to see what 4/3 can do with a decent sensor ;-)
Well well, I never noticed that....let's hope there's more in the way ;-)
It will be great to see what 4/3 can do with a decent sensor ;-)
Paul Janders: Looked for this info in the DPR preview and also Nikon's website but didn't find it. Does anyone know if the D600 will:
Support the use of non-AF Nikkors by allowing the user to input the maximum f-stop into the menu system like the D300?
Allow for Auto FP high speed sync flash shooting like the D300?
non-AF Nikkors with CPU's, such as the TS lenses, would not require you to input the max aperture.
(This is also the case of various chipped non Nikkor lenses).
AiS lenses, the most common type of non AF lens, do not require the max aperture to be set if the camera is capable of reading the mechanical inications correctly.
Perhaps you meant pre AiS lenses?
to wisepo1 et al........
"Has it got one of those things you can hang your coat on?"
Donnie G: Why do an apples vs oranges comparison between a DSLR and a mirrorless camera when you could just as easily have compared Canon's new hybrid sensor tech against the tech available in its competitor's DSLRs? When you do that side by side autofocus speed test for video capture, then I'll sit up and take notice.
Just a note, electrons do not move a the speed of light, or anything like it. Signals do ;-)
(Think about a long line of newtons balls, the time between a hit at one end and the ball flying off at the other end can indicate a signal speed much greater than the speed of the ball itself).
But this has NOTHING to do with the argument, Bob Meyer is quite right!
Marcelobtp: Anybody noticed that even in the Hybrid mode the mirror moves?So probably in the EOS-M it will be much faster, as the nikon 1, and probably the new NEX 5R.I guess that sony, panasonic and olympus, have much better contrast detection than canon or nikon, so i hope when one of them put this hybrid to work, they will succeed.But one thing that these videos don't show is the accuracy difference, i think working togheter the accuracy will be always better, with hybrid AF.
CAF should always be able to achieve perfect focus unless there is no detail whatsoever. Phase focus has several possible sources of error.
The advantage of phase focus is speed. In hybrid AF the idea is reducing the speed CAF takes.