photo_rb: I feel a bit jaded. Correct me if I am wrong but on a previous article about the NX500, I read that Samsung sent some DPReview staff to Hawaii to test the camera. It is one thing to supply a camera, but a paid holiday is another thing altogether.
If this is true I have a hard time understanding how they could create an objective review on any Samsung.
"They offer opportunities like these"...because they know you will accept a trip to Hawaii but wouldn't be as willing/able to try a camera that a rep brought to your office?
@ Barney Britton - Thanks, I appreciate the response and I have no doubt that other reviewers might not even own up to receiving any perks at all. Still there is no question in my mind why a company like Samsung would offer opportunities like these.
No question Samsung makes quality products and we also know they spread a lot of promotional dollars around. My concern is when a site rates cameras by "percentages", one-upping another camera by a couple of points is probably very important and could possibly mean thousands of dollars in sales.
I think all review sites should have a disclosure page where they can list all the perks they receive from every manufacturer.
I feel a bit jaded. Correct me if I am wrong but on a previous article about the NX500, I read that Samsung sent some DPReview staff to Hawaii to test the camera. It is one thing to supply a camera, but a paid holiday is another thing altogether.
Petrogel: Unfortunately Apple is moving from bad to worst, i don't believe that iPhotos is the evolution of Aperture, Lightroom 5 has already replaced the five year old aperture 3 successfully.
Well here's one from an Apple fan who wanted to like Aperture. When I tried it, the adjustment brush would not allow me to adjust the exposure or density of the area selected by the brush.
Agree with EricCul but I hope they don't make the same move regarding FCPX.
I don't think this idea of convergence is all that prophetic anymore. It was obvious 5 years ago but I think we will have to wait for 6K before it is practical.
Regarding this new Canon for drone use, it is a bit heavy considering the importance of every little bit of weight. What is even more important is if there is any weigh shift while remotely zooming. I haven't checked the specs so I don't know. But anything that can throw off the delicate gimbal balance is a no-no.
If camera makers want their devices to be drone-worthy, they should pay careful attention to connectivity, both video output and control adjustment. For example Sony's NEX cameras are ideally suited for UAV's because of their size but you have to convert the HDMI output to AV in order to transmit it to the operators screen. And firing the shutter or activating video is not a simple process.
Wifi is fine but will it work at the distances these drones can be from the operator?
Just a Photographer: If you can not get funding from a financial investor for this kind of service then it seems to me that its a bad idea to support such site as a kickstarter.
Especially after reading their disclaimer and my job as a project manager my advise would be to stay away from this project unless you want to loose money on it. It seems to me that the wrong people with the wrong experience are trying to get this site launched.
"Risks and challenges
This is a complex software project with unforeseen development challenges inevitably to take place. The biggest risk with a project like this is delivering it on time.
Our major challenge will be connecting with the third-party services and vendors. We have the least experience in this..."
I think more and more kickstarter projects are created to attract customers in addition to getting funding. It's like free advertising.
It's not easy taking photos in conditions like these so I appreciate the effort in getting these great shots.
sgitlin: I have a question re image #5, the black rhino at night. According to the exif data the exposure was ISO 1600, f5.6, for 30 seconds. If you blow the picture up to its max. you can see slight star trails instead of points for the stars, which makes me think that 30 seconds is probably correct for exposure time. If it is correct, it's amazing that the rhino doesn't move a centimeter during that whole time, as the image is extremely sharp, even the hairs on its ear. Does this seem possible, or am I missing something here?
I think the rhino was exposed by the flash and perhaps the photographer photoshopped away any of the rhino caught by the time exposure.
That is some of the better drone photography.
JP001: Wow, I'm amazed by all the people dismissing this because 'it's not as good as Wacom'. As if they are all shareholders who feel their dividend is under attack. Okay, so a Wacom is much better. But this is not meant for people who have are torn between buying a Wacom or buying an iPad with this app. This is for people who already have an iPad, and maybe a Wacom as well. I do, but I don't carry my Wacom when I'm on the road. It stays at home, attached to the Mac Pro. But I have to edit images more and more while I'm away from home, for social media, but also because clients wants them asap. On the road, I have an 11" Macbook Air and an iPad Mini. With this app, they finally could work together, and I have no doubts it will beat using the trackpad on the Macbook for editing.
They all had cords, but I see some of the newer ones are wireless...I'm not talking about the pens, btw.
photo_rb: Go to Google Image search, look for "iPad Art" and then tell me this is useless or "junk" for drawing or sketching.
Interesting reply. I guess that puts you in the "it's not the talent, it's the tool" camp.
Go to Google Image search, look for "iPad Art" and then tell me this is useless or "junk" for drawing or sketching.
I bought a Wacom tablet back around 1995, I think it was about 7"x9" and cost around $700. I never felt that the "pressure-touch" system worked even remotely like a real brush but the biggest issue I had was with the cord. I bought a cheaper USB Wacom about 5 years ago and had the same issues. I never was comfortable using these and they mostly sat on a shelf.I haven't tried this iPad setup yet but it gets rid of my biggest Wacom complaint in that it is cordless. Maybe the new Wacom's are cordless too, I don't know.
I also find that because of advancements, I am using Photoshop and other image apps differently and have less need for precise brush control. I tend to use gradients a lot more these days.
What you forget is that you started the "junk" comments and his comment was likely a reaction to that.
Joe Przybylski: I just downloaded the demo and tried this out. For everyone slamming it I have to warn you this is not a bad experience for anyone that cannot afford to drop thousands on a wacom. I tested it on Photoshop and Illustrator with pretty amazing results. it's not perfect ... but for a 1.0 release I'm very impressed.
I haven't used a Wacom in years. but just wondering if this iPad app might offer something that the Wacom doesn't in terms of multiple finger controls like pinch zooming.
electrophoto: meh, I will stick to my trusty wacom....I've tried "pressure sensitive" pens on the ipad in the past - and the precision was sorely lacking... and half of the time the apps will register my palm touching the screen, etc.Add this to 49$ for the app plus approx. 60$ for the better stylus models (the ones that actually at least function to some degree) and you've got well over 100$ invested in this.when for 200$ you can get a basic wacom tablet new ... or find a used pro-model for even less. doesn't make any sense.
Actually Menneisyys you are the one with the militant attitude with your iSheep comments.
As so many Apple haters do, you're reacting to a barely visible presence when you mention the rare Apple fanatic.
I've seen some amazing sketching and painting done on the iPad...you should google iPad art someday.Of course it could be done better with a Wacom couldn't it? I mean it's all about the tool not the person wielding it.
And don't get me wrong, a Wacom would have better controls, that's a given. But this solution might be useful too...it is worth trying before knocking.
yslee1: Now that I really would like to see. No sense adopting a 500g camera to a drone when you don't need a lot of the weight associated with it (in particular, the LCD).
Analog video out would be even better as it could go straight to a video TX.
Agree. It's too bad every camera maker can't make one drone or remote specific camera. Lowering the weight is one thing but another is the complexity of hooking up a remote shutter and video display.