Lives in United States Western, United States
Joined on Apr 13, 2007


Total: 31, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

sh10453: Part1
I have tried Luminar for Windows, Beta version.
I think it is a good product for people who simply want to do click, click, click, done!
Plenty of presets already baked in, but the user has little of precise control.

As a PaintShop Pro user, I prefer an editor that gives me full control to do precisely what I want to do.
Presets are fine for many users, and for some situations, but I think they are not for people who want to control their editing process.

I found that Luminar has tremendous control. I recommend you give it another try. Don't be fools by the Presets. They are just a starting point, and one that you do not need to use.

The real power of Luminar is masked by the incomplete functionality of the Windows beta. If you look at the videos of the released Mac version, you can see the full feature set... very impressive. I'm looking forward to trying out the released Win version. And would love to understand more about the DAM they're working on for 2018.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 13:58 UTC
In reply to:

David Mantripp: Well, I don't know about their DAM, but going by their website, Luminar seems to mainly provide a rapid way to turn nice shots into absolute gross aberrations that only a Peter Lik client would like (or wannabe Peter Like like Trey Ratclife), and their comparison chart with Aperture and Lightroom is so economic with the truth that it would make a politician blush. (example - Aperture apparently had no "Clarity" tool. Non-economic truth version: Ap's "Clarity" tool is called "Details" ... basically, MacPhun take any feature, add the word "Filter" to it, and then claim that the competition doesn't have it. MacShysters more like...)

I've used the Win beta of Luminar and am very impressed. It has a lot of missing functionality relative to the Mac version, but what is there works well. The Win beta is really more of an alpha, given the amount of missing functionality.

Luminar seems to do a great job developing raw files. I've used On1Raw a lot over the past year, always hoping to be convinced that it could replace LR, because I really like its feature set. I came close several times, but then I'd encounter an image that just looked mushy, out of focus, lacking detail and lacking smooth tonal gradation. So, I think I've finally given up on On1Raw. In contrast, Luminar seems to have nailed the development features of the program: I can easily obtain results that are as good as or better than LR.

I'm seriously considering getting the Windows version of Luminar when it comes out, hoping that the DAM will follow in 2018, as Macphun has indicated. Until then, I'll continue to use LR4 for organization.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 13:51 UTC
On article Canon announces EF 50mm F1.8 STM lens (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

Togglebolt: 7 blades, sharpened properly can produce a sharp image but the difficulty in disassembling this lens and then to remove the aperture blades to sharpen would be a deal breaker for me. Never mind trying to put them all back together!! Of course if they come pre-sharpened like Nikon's aperture blades, then you can get at least 5K shots before needing sharpening. It's a shame these apertures get dull so easy. I have a closet full of disassembled lenses with dull apertures, such a shame to see all that nice glass not being used. I guess thats how Canon gets everyone to buy new lenses, ship them dull, make them difficult to sharpen and people just toss them & buy a new one, just like a shaving razor!

Harrys.com is now offering blades for all of Canon's STM lenses... Excellent quality, better than OEM.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2015 at 22:59 UTC

Since when does Photoshop handle 3D information?!?!? Is that new with this version or has it had that capability for some time?

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2014 at 18:03 UTC as 49th comment | 3 replies
On article Sigma announces all-new 50mm F1.4 DG HSM 'Art' lens (244 comments in total)
In reply to:

tornwald: I am betting this will be able to compete with the Zeiss Otus. For a lot less money

I'm not sure your logic works... according to your thinking (price of 35mm vs. 50mm) then the Otus would not cost $4K.

As I understand the announcement, Sigma is looking to create a lens that competes with the Otus, not the Canon 50f1.4.

Also, given Sigma's great success as of late, if they did produce a lens that is at least comparable to the Otus, then I'd guess the price would be somewhat above $1000,maybe $1200-1500.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2014 at 17:26 UTC
On article Sigma announces all-new 50mm F1.4 DG HSM 'Art' lens (244 comments in total)
In reply to:

tornwald: I am betting this will be able to compete with the Zeiss Otus. For a lot less money

OK, these comments are based on a price of...???? As far as I can tell no price has been announced. Did I miss it?

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2014 at 13:49 UTC
On article Sigma announces all-new 50mm F1.4 DG HSM 'Art' lens (244 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nukunukoo: Owning the newest Sigmas, this one is my must! If it gets priced similar to the original's $599, then Nikon's Lens thunder has essentially been pwned! I can hear the collective moans of many a Nikon execs.

BTW, the past Sigma 50mm was (and still is) quite good but tis time I post it on eBay for this new bad boy!

I'm guessing something like $1500, if indeed it is going after the Zeiss level of quality.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2014 at 13:46 UTC

Nothing listed here makes me want to upgrade from Elements 10. Though I use LR4 for most of my editing.

Link | Posted on Sep 24, 2013 at 19:38 UTC as 28th comment | 6 replies
On article Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Review (361 comments in total)
In reply to:

David Naylor: Wow, this "AF issue" is being blown completely out of proportion. I've had this lens for over a month now and haven't had even the slightest indication that there is anything wrong with the AF. If there is any inconsistency I'd say it is well within the limits of what is normal for any lens using phase-detect focus.

And since the open-loop AF myth has been de-bunked (i.e. PDAF *does* confirm focus after shifting) then a large part (all?) of any inconsistency will be the fault of the AF sensor.

Very informative review Andy. Thanks for your efforts.

While I've had the 18-35 for less than a week and have had limited opportunity to use it, I have to agree with David Naylor about the AF. I have not had any concerns with it thus far. I was surprised to find it was a concern in the review.

By way of contrast, my 50mmf1.8 is totally untrustworthy re: AF. I do not feel that way about the Sigma f18-35. Yes I know, apples and oranges. I'm just trying to give my sense of the magnitude of the problem: I don't doubt that the reviewers have identified a legitimate issue, but I simply haven't found it to be a limiting factor thus far. It certainly is a limiting factor with my nifty-fifty.

Link | Posted on Sep 3, 2013 at 11:58 UTC
In reply to:

Gary Martin: Impressive lens, but I wonder how resistant it is to flare. My previous experience with Sigma lenses has been problematic in that regard.

Not very well, unfortunately. Flare is the one area in which it gets dinged in the Lenstip review.

But that won't stop me from buying it.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2013 at 12:11 UTC
On article Just posted: Our Canon EOS 70D hands-on preview (355 comments in total)
In reply to:

57even: If you had a choice between better live view AF and better DR and noise performance, which would you choose?

live view af performance

Link | Posted on Jul 3, 2013 at 11:35 UTC
On article Just posted: Our Canon EOS 70D hands-on preview (355 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kirppu: "AF works in light levels as low as 0 EV"
So what does this actually mean, no pahse detection in very very low light?
Aka black cat in coal mine. :)

Ahh, no... the equivalent aperture setting for 0 EV using a 2-sec exposure is f1.4, one stop down from f1.0.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2013 at 21:52 UTC
On article Just posted: Our Canon EOS 70D hands-on preview (355 comments in total)
In reply to:

Donnie G: For me, sometimes it's just fun to try and guess what Canon's next move is going to be. Since the 70D is so close to the 7D in terms of features, I'm guessing that Canon will either drop the 7D type from their line or take it up to a price point above USD $1900 (probably $2099) in order to offer buyers a clear choice of either top level APS-C performance or entry into their full frame sensor bodies. As for the new phase detection AF CMOS sensor tech, I have no doubt that it will find its way into every Canon imaging product from the 70D on up, because it really is a game changer. EOS M, Powershot, and Rebel buyers will most likely have to make do with hybrid contrast detect/phase detect sensors similar to what's available in the T5i now. It just makes sense from a marketing standpoint. And even if it doesn't, it's still my best guess for the next new product cycle.

I agree with your first point, a $1900-$2100 7D Mark II makes a lot of sense to me, but disagree that the EOS M and Rebel lines will not utilize the new Phase Detect AF Sensor. From my view, Canon would be crazy to not give these lines the advantage of fast, accurate Live View AF. There are certainly plenty of other features that sufficiently differentiate the 70D from the M and Rebels.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2013 at 21:47 UTC

OK, let me say first that I am very impressed by this lens and am close to preordering one.

However, I haven't seen anyone comment on the character of the oof background blur. While the highlight bokeh seems good (though it has some edge highlighting at some apertures), it seems to me that much of the oof background areas are a bit "nervous." Has anyone else noticed this?

I've tried to compare 35mm f1.8 images from this lens to similar images taken with Sigma's 35mm f1.4 lens, and it seems to me the f1.4 lens produces a smoother, calmer background.

I think I'm going to get flamed for this critical comment, but I am interested in what others think about this.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2013 at 12:49 UTC as 14th comment | 1 reply
On article Adobe releases Photoshop Lightroom 5 (252 comments in total)
In reply to:

jquagga: $80 bucks; no significant new features. Right, let me sign right up for that.

It doesn't even pass the laugh test.

I agree that the spot correction tool is a great addition. Also the more flexible vignette tool.

But I'm going to wait to upgrade... I just bought LR4.3 a few months back (currently running 4.4) and am saving my photography dollars for a new lens.

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2013 at 13:30 UTC
In reply to:

Alwynj: New sensor? Ok, if you say so. I was looking at replacing my D7000 with a 7d or upcoming 70d or 7d mark ii. However, if this is Canon's take on advancement then I'll stay put. It's said this sensor will do duty in the '70d' as well and as far as I can see it's no where near the D7000 sensor. I want 7d focus and speed yes, but wouldn't like to sacrifice IQ and DR

"To use today's DR to its full extend, means exposing for the highlights in a large DR scene, which usually means underexposing shadows and pushing them in a converter..."

Gotta agree with hoawardroark on this one... TrojMacReady, it seems you are describing an approah that is widely viewed as poor digital practice precisley because it aggravates the shadow noise problem.

As howard indicated, best practice recommends overexposing the highlights w/o blowing them, and then pulling the highlights down during PP.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2013 at 19:12 UTC
In reply to:

mraad: I was a bit sceptical, but at first glance it does seem to be a new/improved sensor. Especially the high ISO samples (6400 ones) seem quite a bit cleaner than what my t2i/550d is able to produce.

I am actually quite curious now for the review!

I agree... re: high ISO noise the photos seem to be about 1-stop better than I'd expect to get with my 550d.

I too am interested in reading the full review.

But no tilt screen!?!?! That's a real dissappointment for me.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2013 at 13:18 UTC
On article Just Posted: Canon EOS 6D In-depth Review (532 comments in total)
In reply to:

InTheMist: The compressed focusing coverage on both the 6D and D600 put me off.

Am I alone?

I agree on this... is there some advantage (less cost) to putting all the focus points jammed in the middle? It seems obvious that they ought to be around the third points, but they hardly ever are.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2013 at 11:12 UTC

Looks like an ingenious approach to minimizing tripod size.

Theoretically there is a slight reduction in the stability of the center column due to the change in cross-section of the center post but I suspect it is a non-issue in real-life situations.

Looks like a winner.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2013 at 16:21 UTC as 45th comment | 1 reply
On photo Blue Harley in the The Color Blue - PART II challenge (2 comments in total)

I gave this 3.5 stars. Would have been 4.5 if the background was more OOF and the bike just a bit more exposed.

In any case, it's a good image of the bike.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2012 at 18:37 UTC as 2nd comment
Total: 31, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »