Bye bye aperture. Hello LR

[Per PN]

I've been using aperture for the past 2 years and i am actually very happy with the program as I mostly shoot with my leica M9 but i cannot live with that it does not support my Panasonic gf 1 and lx3. I've been waiting for the new AP3 and hoping that the RAW files would be supported. Aperture will fail to be the pros choise. I can only recommend you to switch to LR as i know adobe will always be better and quicker to support new cameras.

--
Per Nicolaisen

Photo's of my East Greenland:
http://www.byper.net

 

[hoover blank]

Uh...... LX3 RAW support has been added.

 

[KAllen]

LX3 is supported, no doubt the GF1 will be soon.

Kevin.

 

[aj_taylor]

I don't buy this argument of "pros won't use it because it doesn't support the latest cameras". Most professional photographers treat their cameras as tools, not toys. As such, they find a tool that works, and stick with it. They buy their cameras based on whether it'll work with their existing setup.

 

[Johanfoto]

I've been using aperture for the past 2 years and i am actually very happy with the program as I mostly shoot with my leica M9 but i cannot live with that it does not support my Panasonic gf 1 and lx3. I've been waiting for the new AP3 and hoping that the RAW files would be supported. Aperture will fail to be the pros choise.

Aperture will fail to be the pros choice because it doesn't support a consumer camera like the GF1? Gimme a break! Besides, Aperture already does support the LX3 and because the GF1 has the same sensor as the -already supported- GH1, it will be only a short time before the OS (it's the OS that determines which cameras are supported, not Aperture) supports that one too.

--
Johan
http://www.johanfoto.com

 

[muntzphoto]

I couldn't agree more...

and the funny thing is... A Leica M9? How many commercial professional would come CLOSE to using that camera for commercial assignments. Sure we've all lusted for the rich mans neck toy, granted I respect everything that a Leica is and it's roots, not to mention allll the famous people that used it in the beginning. But remember the famous photographers that used the Leica early on was because it was, at the time, the most sophisticated camera of its time... We are in a different time period all together! Manual Focus is dead for 99.999999% of all photographers... and M9 is an expensive toy that can produce ok images. I have personally used the camera and compared to my D3x... no way is it worth it, especially in a commercial/stock environment...

and I'm sure someone will mention the S2... well thats great if you're, again, someone with a ton of money to blow. There are way better viable options coming from Leaf and Phase... (with better sensors as well and better s/n ratios)

but to talk about things more on topic... What Apreture 3 is trying to accomplish with the merging of Multi-Media!! GENIUS!!! I mean really!! Awesome Awesome Awesome!! Not only will it organize my photos!! It will now organize and keyword ALL MY AUDIO AND HD VIDEO!!!! wowowowowow.

I've been using Lightroom 2 since it came out.... for me it was about speed and usability and Aperture 2 and 1 just really feel sort for me. But Lightroom 2 always lacked that "Mac" integration that I missed sooo much! I'm really hoping that Version 3 will be everything I've hoped for!

 

[muntzphoto]

and and haha why would someone even bother shooting RAW on a GF1... its leisure camera...not to mention an LX3. I personally have an LX3 and I take it with me to just have fun and break away from all my commercial stuff! why the heck would I want to go home and RAW process all my point and shoot files? to me that is destroying the purpose of a point and shoot all together!

--
Muntz Photography
Zaandam, NL

 

[laszlokovacs]

Door, meet bum.

 

[Stu 5]

I don't buy this argument of "pros won't use it because it doesn't support the latest cameras". Most professional photographers treat their cameras as tools, not toys. As such, they find a tool that works, and stick with it. They buy their cameras based on whether it'll work with their existing setup.

Incorrect they buy software that offers support to their cameras and good support to the brands they use and that includes the ones they hire out or are likely to hire in the future. If it doesn't we just don't buy the software and we go else where.

Client:

So we can't get this shot because the camera you need to hire is not supported by the software you use...................... well can't you use software that does?

Some of the pro cameras that are not supported:

Hasselblad - 13 cameras!

Leica - some including S2

Mamiya - The whole range!

Phase 1 - The whole range!

 

[Stu 5]

and and haha why would someone even bother shooting RAW on a GF1... its leisure camera...not to mention an LX3. I personally have an LX3 and I take it with me to just have fun and break away from all my commercial stuff! why the heck would I want to go home and RAW process all my point and shoot files? to me that is destroying the purpose of a point and shoot all together!

Because processing a RAW file is easy to do. So you are saying you could not take a photo with a GF1 that you could sell? The GF1 can take as good a quality a photo as DSLR in the right hands.

--
Muntz Photography
Zaandam, NL

 

[noirdesir]

Some of the pro cameras that are not supported:

Hasselblad - 13 cameras!

Leica - some including S2

Mamiya - The whole range!

Phase 1 - The whole range!

Yeah, but the whole Canon and Nikon range is supported (and usually in a pretty timely manner, at least compared to cameras like the LX3) and that probably covers 85% of all professional photographers.

 

[xb70fan]

and and haha why would someone even bother shooting RAW on a GF1... its leisure camera...not to mention an LX3. I personally have an LX3 and I take it with me to just have fun and break away from all my commercial stuff! why the heck would I want to go home and RAW process all my point and shoot files? to me that is destroying the purpose of a point and shoot all together!

--
Muntz Photography
Zaandam, NL

So my GF1 is a point and shoot? I guess I must have missed that in the product specs.

--
Toronto, Ontario, Canada

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Canon 5D2 / Panasonic GF1

 

[muntzphoto]

"Because processing a RAW file is easy to do. So you are saying you could not take a photo with a GF1 that you could sell? The GF1 can take as good a quality a photo as DSLR in the right hands."

I'm not saying that at all. I'm sure you could sell the images. the Nikon D1 was doing billboards back in the day...so why not the GF1.

But for example... When you spend a bunch of money to travel around the world and take a beautiful photo, maybe even a once and life time moment... do you really want that image to come off that tiny sensor? (lets assume the output would be for Stock) or not even that... what if you spent an 3 hours in your basement taking stock photos (or your studio) you want the best bang for your imagery... and it really comes down to IQ. Most stock agencies frown upon major adjustments...

There are millions of photos of clouds out there. How many photos have been captured with a Large Format or a Medium format camera with a digital back? when a company is searching for the most viable option for their new campaign and you're file just doesn't cut it... well that is why I wouldn't consider a GF1 a viable commercial camera

Now OF COURSE I WISH IT WAS!! I would love for that lil thing to get results like a D3x!!! that would be freaking awesome!! and I would shoot with it all the time for commercial assignments!!! but until that quality arrives... I can't consider it for my specific commercial needs

--
Muntz Photography
Zaandam, NL

 

[muntzphoto]

I'm really not trying to offend any owners of a GF1! I really really really like that little camera!!! I'm a big freaking fan of it...

But the original poster was talking about commercial imagery... and you just cannot come close to comparing a GF1 with my D3x or Aptus back... just not going to happen.

and again I'm only talking about really world commercial assignments. (in my head that is advertising and stock photo shoots)

I'm sure you could use a GF1 for editorial purposes!! more than likely! I mean hell they are publishing camera phone spreads

--
Muntz Photography
Zaandam, NL

 

[Stu 5]

I'm really not trying to offend any owners of a GF1! I really really really like that little camera!!! I'm a big freaking fan of it...

But the original poster was talking about commercial imagery... and you just cannot come close to comparing a GF1 with my D3x or Aptus back... just not going to happen.

and again I'm only talking about really world commercial assignments. (in my head that is advertising and stock photo shoots)

I'm sure you could use a GF1 for editorial purposes!! more than likely! I mean hell they are publishing camera phone spreads

Exactly and you could use it for an image in a book no problem so there are people out there who will use it for professional photography. Plus on top of that lots of amateurs that use it as a second camera. There are even some pro photographers out there who have switched from Canon to the Olympus EP1 for senior photography. So there are lots of people who need RAW support for these cameras.

--
Muntz Photography
Zaandam, NL

 

[Stu 5]

Some of the pro cameras that are not supported:

Hasselblad - 13 cameras!

Leica - some including S2

Mamiya - The whole range!

Phase 1 - The whole range!

Yeah, but the whole Canon and Nikon range is supported (and usually in a pretty timely manner, at least compared to cameras like the LX3) and that probably covers 85% of all professional photographers.

So why have so many pro photographers switched to Lightroom because they are sick to death of of the continued poor RAW support in Aperture. Even those Canon/Nikon users hire out different brands sometimes and what they don't want to do is have to mess around with different software. Also even with Canon/Nikon Apple have been slow to support sometimes.

 

[Stu 5]

"Because processing a RAW file is easy to do. So you are saying you could not take a photo with a GF1 that you could sell? The GF1 can take as good a quality a photo as DSLR in the right hands."

I'm not saying that at all. I'm sure you could sell the images. the Nikon D1 was doing billboards back in the day...so why not the GF1.

But for example... When you spend a bunch of money to travel around the world and take a beautiful photo, maybe even a once and life time moment... do you really want that image to come off that tiny sensor? (lets assume the output would be for Stock) or not even that... what if you spent an 3 hours in your basement taking stock photos (or your studio) you want the best bang for your imagery... and it really comes down to IQ. Most stock agencies frown upon major adjustments...

Well the sensor is not tiny enough for it not to be accepted by Getty when it is in the form of an E3. The E3 is on their accepted list.

There are many forms of professional photography where a sensor of that size is more than acceptable. Depending on the size of image required it can even out perform a FF camera. FF cameras are good for lots of things but not everything.

There are millions of photos of clouds out there. How many photos have been captured with a Large Format or a Medium format camera with a digital back? when a company is searching for the most viable option for their new campaign and you're file just doesn't cut it... well that is why I wouldn't consider a GF1 a viable commercial camera

Now OF COURSE I WISH IT WAS!! I would love for that lil thing to get results like a D3x!!! that would be freaking awesome!! and I would shoot with it all the time for commercial assignments!!! but until that quality arrives... I can't consider it for my specific commercial needs

--
Muntz Photography
Zaandam, NL

 

[muntzphoto]

ok ok ok ok ok...

I agree with the support... BUT BUT BUT !! haha but really how much D-Range does that tiny little sensor have?
--
Muntz Photography
Zaandam, NL

 

[Robgo2]

I have no doubt that many professional photographers will use Aperture 3, but I would bet that most of its users will be amateurs, and the same is true of Lightroom. Amateurs may be influenced in their choice of software by pros, but it is amateur enthusiasts who are the major target market.

Rob

 

[foy]

Have they?