Thanks for the analysis at the end. I was sure this was some sort of parody. I kept seeing/hearing John Belushi from Saturday Night Live as a Samurai Nikon engineer being interviewed by Dan Aykroyd.
I spoke with Amazon Cloud tech support. He sounded unsure but said "most common RAW files" were acceptable. He had never heard of Olympus by the way.
The other issue I raised was how would the files be organized. Again, I got the impression this had not been a major consideration. He said you could organize them once they were up. However, he wasn't aware of key wording or other sorting techniques. What that meant to me was that I might need to upload one folder of images, create a folder with those images and then upload another folder of images. When I asked him if that was correct, he said "I think so".
Finally I pointed out I have 2 TB of photos. He didn't think that would be a problem, except of course upload time.
For now I'll hold off at least until the RAW file and organization issues are made clear.
Forget all the sexist stuff. Who would order a bag they've never seen, never tried on and never put their gear in?
You didn't show the back of the camera. Does it have separate AF-On and AEL buttons, or the capability to do this. Olympus OMD 1, for instance, doesn't.
marc petzold: Nice Info about that particular picture background, i was happy to read it,more of that, please. That composition looks very good to my eyes.
Apart from that, the Canon 16-35 L II Lens wasn't that good reviewed at lenstip, for example:
Canon EF 16-35 mm f/2.8L II USM11. Summary
solid, sealed barrel, excellent image quality in the frame centre, chromatic aberration sensibly controlled, only slight distortion, taking into account the focal lengths range, low astigmatism, low vignetting level, very quick, silent and accurate autofocus, lens hood and a case included.
unacceptable image quality at frame edge in the aperture range from f/2.8-4.0, average work against bright light, bad price/quality ratio.
A few years ago on another site someone put up a nice landscape shot and talked about how he saw it and processed it according to his vision. He received very similar comments about "anybody could do this" and "you should have done such and such'. The person after sometime pointed out that he had posted an image by Muench or Adams, I forget exactly who, that was both well known, well respected and highly valued.
Would I see and process your image differently, sure, so would Monet and I would probably paint a lily pond differently than he. Some of the comments are presented as legitimate points of view so I am not complaining about everyone who provided an opinion, but some are just obnoxious remarks by people who... Well enough said. I hope the arm chair quarter backs don't deter further posts on how you achieve your results.
Nicely detailed instructions but the title is misleading as this article has nothing to do with high key photography. I'll bet that many readers would appreciate a follow up that uses your models to demonstrate what a high key photo looks like and how to achieve it.
"as it stands now the Sony A57 is a no brainier in my opinion for the feature set, quality, and cost. "
Gee, a review of three camera brands by someone who goes by the handle SonyAlphaLab.
I'm not sure if this is a high water mark for idiocy, or low for DPReview.
And for the record, my comment is not aimed at the reviewer, for all I know everything he said is perfectly correct. My disdain is aimed at the person at DPReview who thought this was a good idea, or perhaps more fairly, didn't think.