winkalman

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Aug 29, 2005

Comments

Total: 78, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »

From an official Adobe blog entry dated May 6, 2013

Q. Will there be a different version of Lightroom called Lightroom CC?
A. No.

Q. Will Lightroom become a subscription only offering after Lightroom 5?
A. Future versions of Lightroom will be made available via traditional perpetual licenses indefinitely.

http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2013/05/lightroom-and-the-creative-cloud.html

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 15:22 UTC as 188th comment | 5 replies

These look pretty nice, but it seems like Microsoft has adopted Apple pricing. Unfortunately, the PC's are cheaper truism only seems to hold when you're comparing a MacBook to some sad lump of plastic from Dell or Acer.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 12:39 UTC as 9th comment

I don't see any mention of it, so I'm assuming this doesn't offer a global shutter?

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 14:39 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply

If I could actually afford this, I'd be pretty bummed that there's no mechanical shutter with the 16mm (24mm-e) lens.

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2017 at 12:43 UTC as 24th comment
On article Yashica is teasing a comeback to the camera market (299 comments in total)

I'll throw my two cents into the wishing well and hope for an affordable, digital version of the Yashica T4. A 1" or m4/3 sensor with a 40mm(equivalent) fixed lens and a price tag south of $350. If it were jeans pocketable, I'd snag one in an instant.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2017 at 16:11 UTC as 114th comment
In reply to:

Dennis: $1700

Vision over profit

Hmmm ....

"If they are wrong, the market will tell them"

True enough, but Sony has a long history of not listening.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2017 at 20:00 UTC
In reply to:

Rooru S: As a pilot, I agree with this. I had enough with clueless people flying their drones on and near the final approach path to local airports. Those people are just seeking getting a 'cool shot' to share over social media over safety.

There must be a way to hold people accountable for their silly actions.

@Rooru S
"Many people are using their drones recklessly because they don't feel the threat of getting prosecuted and held accountable for any mishap due to operation of drones in restricted, sensitive or inappropriate airspace."

• I'd love to see some proof to back that statement up. Though, perhaps we simply disagree on what constitutes 'many' •

"...by registering a drone with your name, you know and you keep in mind you might get in trouble if you cause problems..."

• I'm not clear on what sort of system the UN has in mind, but the registration database that we had briefly in the US was nothing more than a requirement to place a label on your aircraft with an identifying number. My guess is that in practical terms that doesn't accomplish much since anyone with malicious intent will simply not comply and, even in the case of recklessness, you have to count on being able to recover that sticker. •

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 20:12 UTC
In reply to:

Rooru S: As a pilot, I agree with this. I had enough with clueless people flying their drones on and near the final approach path to local airports. Those people are just seeking getting a 'cool shot' to share over social media over safety.

There must be a way to hold people accountable for their silly actions.

It's unclear to me how a worldwide drone registry does anything to address the problem you're describing.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 14:22 UTC

"Central to the goal behind a single global registry is the ability to create standardized regulations that could be adopted by many countries. Such standardization would relieve the burden drone makers currently face over creating devices that meet the requirements of different markets."

What does a universal drone registry have to do with standardizing regulations? One can certainly exist without the other.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 14:20 UTC as 37th comment | 1 reply

I can't help but think this test would have been more useful with raw files calibrated to a grey card. White balance presets almost never give me colors that I'm happy with. At the same time, color problems that you can't fix with the temperature and tint sliders are the most tedious to correct.

I also think Nikon's higher color saturation hurt them quite a bit. I always tried to pick the most neutral file and the saturation on the Nikon files made them seem less correctable even when the color was decent.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2017 at 13:13 UTC as 137th comment

Technical Editor Rishi seems a bit conflicted on whether or not a camera's internal color science matters.

From 'Opinion: Thinking about buying medium format? Read this first'

"You get Fujifilm ergonomics and color science in a body capable of far better image quality than Fujifilm's APS-C offerings. But remember you can emulate much of that color science in Raw converters with proper profiles (we're looking into a separate article on this)."

From this article:

"While shooting Raw helps poor white balance issues, it’s not a panacea for a disagreeable color engine. Putting aside for a moment the convenience of using straight-out-of-camera JPEGs, Raw converters like Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) include camera-specific profiles that emulate the manufacturer’s various color modes, so if they’re not to your taste to begin with, the Raw conversions are also unlikely to be palatable."

Which is it DPR?

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2017 at 12:42 UTC as 141st comment | 2 replies
On article The DJI Spark is a $500 HD mini drone (96 comments in total)
In reply to:

Internet Enzyme: Seems kind of expensive for those specs.

DJS's own Phantom 3 Standard beats this in a lot of ways and is in the same price bracket (if not a little cheaper). Undoubtedly this little guy will have it's fans, but I'd go for the Phantom 3 with a better camera, longer flight times, and presumably will get tossed around a bit less in the wind.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2017 at 12:18 UTC
On article 2017 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras around $500 (351 comments in total)
In reply to:

Retro1976: Hmm, one major major problem with the Sony, you can't see the screen outdoors in bright light. I had that model for just a week and attempted to take pictures of my kids outdoors, no dice, I missed every shot. For that very reason, there is no way i would recommend the Sony.

@Richard
"...something like 97% of people buying cameras at this level never buy anything beyond the kit lens."

If you're working under the (largely true) assumption that most users will never buy another lens, wouldn't you want to recommend a camera that has a decent kit lens to begin with?

Link | Posted on May 15, 2017 at 15:45 UTC
In reply to:

RingoMan: For years I used 6x7 for studio, wedding, and portraits. We used vignettes, soft focus lenses and much more. None of those were adaptable to 35 mm. Phisical size and way too much depth of field at studio apertures like f11.0 for groups simply did not work.
This camera, Fuji or Hasselblad is great to bring that routine back to classic shooters. Your comparison is valid for engineers, not most professional studio and wedding photographers. All I need now is a shift wide and the system is complete. Auto focus is useless in a studio or wedding. I need to focus myself. Works for me.

It seems like there are plenty of existing tilt/shift lenses that should be easily adaptable to the Fuji. I guess we'll have to wait and see what the 3rd party companies come up with though.

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2017 at 19:46 UTC

This seems to be written for photographers who only want to optimize one aspect of image quality at a time. For anyone that wants the best dynamic range AND noise AND sharpness, the Fuji GFX 50s will likely be a great option. Also worth noting, if you care about image sharpness to the point that you're willing to spend $10,000+ on gear, shooting lenses at the FF equivalent of f1.4 is probably not something you do often.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 15:22 UTC as 90th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Irakly Shanidze: How loud is the fan?

"Color Accuracy > 95 CRI (Color Rendering Index)"

Step 1) click link
Step 2) read

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2017 at 21:12 UTC
In reply to:

goodgeorge: Dear Nikon,

a) take Coolpix A
b) add better AF
c) profit

That is my recommended recipe. Please please please.

Coolpix A + weather sealing + 40mm equivalent (28mm f2.0 would be perfect) lens would be a dream.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2017 at 13:45 UTC
On article TwoEyes VR stereoscopic camera simulates human vision (52 comments in total)
In reply to:

winkalman: I think they're about 7 years late...

https://www.engadget.com/2009/01/05/minoru-3d-webcam-ships-this-week-still-looks-freaky/

I was partly taking a cheap shot at the similar design aesthetic. I'm also pretty skeptical that they can pull off convincing 3D in a 360 video with only 2 cameras per plane. It seems like the off axis parallax would be problematic. After a second look at the kickstarter page, I see that they have a sample 3D 360 video. I'll check it out on a 3D projector at work on Monday; hopefully I'll be proven wrong. If this thing actually delivers, it would be a pretty exciting product at that price point.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2017 at 04:36 UTC
On article TwoEyes VR stereoscopic camera simulates human vision (52 comments in total)

I think they're about 7 years late...

https://www.engadget.com/2009/01/05/minoru-3d-webcam-ships-this-week-still-looks-freaky/

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2017 at 20:00 UTC as 9th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

psilore: Why f/2.8 though?
DoF , okay, but if light gathering is such a priority... I'm not complaining, I just don't get the reasoning behind the choice

I'd be willing to place a large bet that they're using a fixed focus lens, hence the need for extra depth of field.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 02:05 UTC
Total: 78, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »