sunnycal

sunnycal

Lives in United States San Diego, AK, United States
Has a website at http://500pix.com/zafar1
Joined on Dec 29, 2012

Comments

Total: 103, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Nikon D850 vs Sony a7R III: Which is best? (1059 comments in total)
In reply to:

EthanP99: Behemouth is right, look at that Nikon.

Quoting camerasize.com. D850 is (in mm) 146x124x78.5, and A7RIII is 126.9x95.6x73.7. Thus about the same depth, and about 25-30% more in height and width. That would make the total volume about 50-60% higher, but we are talking of how it fits in camera bag, and not about how much water it displaces.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2017 at 04:01 UTC
On article Nikon D850 vs Sony a7R III: Which is best? (1059 comments in total)
In reply to:

Chriscotech: On point 7: Configuration and operation.
I don't know about the D850, I shoot Sony and have a 7RIII. While it is an amazing camera and hugely versatile, the setup took me ages and is still a work in progress.

The big problem is that I can't globally backup my settings with Sony Alpha cameras. I had to send my Sony A9 back for a minor issue and was told my settings would be lost. It took 22 photos of the screen to record the settings, and another two hours to reconfigure the camera to how I use it. I used to shoot video with two Panasonic Lumix GH4's. With those I could copy the settings of one camera onto an SD card and use it to quickly match the two cameras. I could also save multiple configurations on my computer.

If the Nikon D850 has a way of globally backing up the camera configuration, I have order envy on that point, it should be a standard feature with the complexity of cameras like these. I wish Sony would get it. Does the Nikon have this feature?

Nikon has this feature for as long as I can remember (going back to D300)

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2017 at 03:50 UTC
On article Nikon D850 vs Sony a7R III: Which is best? (1059 comments in total)
In reply to:

EthanP99: Behemouth is right, look at that Nikon.

Yes, a full 25% larger.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2017 at 06:41 UTC
In reply to:

princecody: Is this the Best clone of LR out there? Adobe is so greedy they could care less about longtime customers like myself who could care less about a subscription to the cloud šŸ˜

For those in the try out mode, I will also recommend After Shot Pro. It is limited as a DAM, but has quite decent processing capabilities, and beats LR for fuji files.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 03:44 UTC
In reply to:

AngularJS: The DR is less than 12 according to photonstophotos
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D850,Sony%20ILCE-7RM2,Sony%20ILCE-7RM3, same level as the A7r2.

@Rishi You apply the same criteria to both Mk II and Mk III, and yet come up with better DR for Mk III, but Bill does not see any improvement, Does it mean that that the improvement is only in excessively noisy areas (which Bill rejects so his numbers do not reflect the improvement)?

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 07:04 UTC
On article What you need to know about Sony's a7R III (622 comments in total)

any guess if AF will be better with adapted Canon lenses?

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 18:42 UTC as 21st comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

WhaleShark: I'm one of those anti-subscription geezers. I'm looking for an LR alternative that can play nicely with the tens of thousands of DNGs I've created within LR. It seems that Capture One does not, as in "DNG support is not optimized for specific cameras", which means that you get screwy color balances when you bring an LR-generated DNG into Capture One. Anyone have an alternative?

Why not but photoshop cs6 from someone used. That should handle ask your dng, no?

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 21:52 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1633 comments in total)
In reply to:

LarsKoueMogensen: RIP Lightroom.
Adobe have chosen greed (and stockholders) over consumers. They promised that we could always get a stand alone soft. Now they move to subscription only and want us to pay us every month so they can relax and do nothing. What soft should I choose instead? #rip-lightroom.

Folks, we have a new definition of greed; someone trying to save pennies (or dollars).

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 21:14 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1633 comments in total)
In reply to:

Suave: Yes, it's "just $10 per month" except that Adobe is not the only company who wants its $10.

@String Two issues with this. One is that depending on the situation, you may need to make modification. Now the effort you spent, which was your time (maybe worth more than subscription price) is gone to waste.

Second and more importantly, today Adobe's policy is to let you browse your images even if you dont have subscription. Who is to stop them from changing this policy? I am not at all confidant that they will maintain this policy forever and hence my recommendation is to bail out?

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 02:15 UTC
On article Hello Lightroom CC: Embracing the future (510 comments in total)

The idea of cloud solution is attractive to me at least. However, like most users I have multi TB of pictures. I would prefer to be able to work on them wherever I am. Hence my preferred solution will be to have a LR instance acting as a server. I do not want to subscribe to 10TB of online data, and I also dont want to wait to have 200GB of data from a shoot uploaded before I can start processing.

What Adobe is building might work for the cellphone photographer, but why would someone pay for that subscription? I have Google photo on my phone, have an unlimited backup, and a nice photo wizard which stylizes, creates HDR, Movies, and Album for me. I dont have to even lift a finger, and it works on my ILC images also which are automatically uploaded to the phone (as I have configured it) and from there to Google Photo.

Microsoft OneDrive also does some of that, but is quite a bit behind.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 00:30 UTC as 147th comment
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1633 comments in total)
In reply to:

Suave: Yes, it's "just $10 per month" except that Adobe is not the only company who wants its $10.

@String. wrong analogy. If you switch your electricity provider your appliances wont stop working. Same goes with your mortgage, insurance, etc.. If you turn off Netflix, yes you can't watch Orange is the new black anymore, but that is Netflix creation. Imagine how you would feel, if you were not able to play your own content?

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 00:19 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1633 comments in total)
In reply to:

PedroMZ: Thank you for an excellent article with which I agree wholeheartedly. What would you recommend in its place?

Capture One, DXO, AfterShot Pro, ACDSee, ON1 are all excellent options. The first three should be iterating by the end of this year, the later two already did (almost). Both ON1 and Capture One will import LR Catalog with Keywords and other metadata. ON1 also claims that they ca make LR export Baked images with your processing and import them.

If you want the PRO features, DXO and Capture One come on top. I think ACDSee is best for image indexing and cataloging (though their editing is no slouch). ON1 Raw is weak (in my opinion) but their specialty is easy effects. Aftershot Pro is really a steal for what it does, but it needs to step up to handle large catalogs.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 23:26 UTC
In reply to:

sunnycal: Goodbye, Adobe. My CC plan is expiring anyway. I will purchase a copy of LR6 off clearance, and keep it to open my current catalog.

There are many good options to have to deal with Adobe nonsense. Capture One, ACDSee, DXO, ON1, Affinity, and more.

Yes, I would like to be able to make changes down the road. Also, who knows how Adobe will handle non-subscribed users in 2020. For all we know, they may change their policy yet again.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 21:47 UTC

Goodbye, Adobe. My CC plan is expiring anyway. I will purchase a copy of LR6 off clearance, and keep it to open my current catalog.

There are many good options to have to deal with Adobe nonsense. Capture One, ACDSee, DXO, ON1, Affinity, and more.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 17:59 UTC as 190th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Rod McD: Focal reducers definitely have their place in adapting down to near sensor sizes, but I can't see this model selling. I thought the Q had passed into history. No new bodies, no new lenses. And whatever the equivalence of Nikon FF lenses on the tiny sensor, the whole galumphing front heavy beastie would defeat the purpose of the Q anyway. I'm happy to be proven wrong.

Brag to who? Pentax users? Regardless, the R&D cost mus have been quite high.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2017 at 22:23 UTC
In reply to:

Rod McD: Focal reducers definitely have their place in adapting down to near sensor sizes, but I can't see this model selling. I thought the Q had passed into history. No new bodies, no new lenses. And whatever the equivalence of Nikon FF lenses on the tiny sensor, the whole galumphing front heavy beastie would defeat the purpose of the Q anyway. I'm happy to be proven wrong.

I suppose that Metabones knows something we dont. Otherwise it wouldn't make any business sense for them to develop this product.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2017 at 05:33 UTC
On article Nikon D850 Review (2104 comments in total)
In reply to:

photomedium: I am not sure what the hysteria with this camera is about. The DR and noise are virtually indistinguishable from the A7RII. This is basically an A7RII DSLR with top notch AF from a $6k camera. The price happens to match the a7rII at launch two years ago. That maybe the only remarkable thing here.

Not true. Looking at the above tool and comparing with A7RII, D850@ISO 64 is much better then A7RII. Even at ISO 100, it is noticeably better.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 05:58 UTC
In reply to:

jdc562: At first the Nikon D850 seemed to be a break-through camera, but Hancock's "D850 high res samples" do little to make the camera an attractive proposition. How sharp are the "high res" images produced by the camera when images 1,3 and 5 show prominent over-sharpening halos? Images 1,4, and 5 show lots of noise in the background. Images 1, 4, and 5 lack sharpness in key areas of the images. All of the images show limited dynamic range. This is way below the IQ performance I was expecting.

+1

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2017 at 06:25 UTC
In reply to:

sunnycal: Can someone remind Adobe Lightroom team that this is 2017 now. We have been paying monthly subscription for the privilege of using a two+ year old product!

Is that why subscription model was put in place?

@Brarney, Aren't you being the one who is Pedantic here? How is it an update when all it does is add new camera support? Am I expected to get a new camera to enjoy this new release?

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 18:45 UTC

Can someone remind Adobe Lightroom team that this is 2017 now. We have been paying monthly subscription for the privilege of using a two+ year old product!

Is that why subscription model was put in place?

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 18:16 UTC as 37th comment | 23 replies
Total: 103, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »