LarryK

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Nov 22, 2001

Comments

Total: 173, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Adobe Creative Suite 6 has been officially retired (351 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reilly Diefenbach: CC the best deal for the most capable photographic software.
Now back to your regularly scheduled whining...

Indentured Servitude: The only way to use Adobe Creative software.

Such a deal!

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2017 at 07:42 UTC
On article Adobe Creative Suite 6 has been officially retired (351 comments in total)
In reply to:

jorg14: Years ago I use to drive past 'auto row' on the way to work. I'd notice all the posted prices: $16,998 for this model, $19,995 for that one, etc.
Within one year, all that changed to lease prices: $399 for this one, $449 for that one etc.
I suspect it's a harbinger of things to come for a lot of products where the manufacturer can get more for selling things piecemeal to people who don't/won't add up the total cost. For heavy users the cost will be minimal. For the rest of us we pay the price.

Of course, leasing is the most expensive way to own a car.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2017 at 07:38 UTC
On article Adobe Creative Suite 6 has been officially retired (351 comments in total)
In reply to:

robbinsbox: The last results from adobe showed subscription model working for them.
Dont really like it myself and have been playing with Affinity which will be fine as a PS replacement.
But how to replace LR, whıch ıs the one I use most of the tıme.

You can still buy the standalone Lightroom, I did last month.

I actually prefer Capture One, but it was a protest purchase, and it never hurts to hedge your bets.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2017 at 07:31 UTC

The mark II was not a "fantastic piece of glass".

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 01:03 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

LarryK: Hey, thanks Panasonic for obsoleting three of my lenses.

Fortunately, I had already moved on to Olympus's superior counterparts, glad I did.

Good, I'll give you priority over the three stiffs in front of you.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 20:28 UTC
In reply to:

LarryK: Hey, thanks Panasonic for obsoleting three of my lenses.

Fortunately, I had already moved on to Olympus's superior counterparts, glad I did.

You guys wanna buy 'em, get in line.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 02:41 UTC

Hey, thanks Panasonic for obsoleting three of my lenses.

Fortunately, I had already moved on to Olympus's superior counterparts, glad I did.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 00:49 UTC as 11th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

LarryK: I hate when they bring out new TS lenses, I can't resist the things.

And why is the one of the first things anybody complains about is "why can't I use a polarizer?" You can't, get over it.

AD in KC
"Because on a brick building in sunlight, the color is washed out by reflected light. It's not a tempting purchase for me, it's a tool - for making an income.

So YOU get over it."

Mine work for as living too, but not doing hyper-critical work like shooting brick walls in sunlight.

Ever try adjusting the exposure? that's a good tip when there's too much light.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2016 at 21:07 UTC

I hate when they bring out new TS lenses, I can't resist the things.

And why is the one of the first things anybody complains about is "why can't I use a polarizer?" You can't, get over it.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 18:51 UTC as 7th comment | 11 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: Fujifilm F10 (121 comments in total)

Still got mine somewhere, at the time it was pretty impressive.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2016 at 01:15 UTC as 38th comment
On article Nikon 105mm F1.4E ED sample images (279 comments in total)
In reply to:

angelo di candia: nikon lens, sigma look pictures.
sharpness, sharpness, sharpness - but ZERO character.

Think what you like. People who view photography strictly in terms of how many pixels they can put on a page are not professionals.

Gimmick or not, it doesn't work on your 6s, so why do you care?

I'm sure "Pros" everywhere are shaking in their boots.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2016 at 20:44 UTC
On article Nikon 105mm F1.4E ED sample images (279 comments in total)
In reply to:

angelo di candia: nikon lens, sigma look pictures.
sharpness, sharpness, sharpness - but ZERO character.

That's okay, I'm good with adding that myself.

Stick with an iPhone 7 and the phony depth of field gimmick.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2016 at 23:56 UTC
In reply to:

whakapu: It's amazing how Fuji has repositioned their brand. 10 years ago I associated Fujifilm with... Fuji film, and with cheap and slightly crappy superzooms producing smeary jpegs. Now, Fujifilm means premium quality.

It meant premium quality then, as well.

You just weren't looking being their low-end consumer products.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 21:28 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Olympus E-M1 Mark II overview video (279 comments in total)
In reply to:

NeilJones: I always laugh when they say it's also geared towards a working pro sports shooter. Yeah a pro sports shooter would use 4/3 when so many great full frame sports camera's!

Maybe they don't want to carry the extra 30LBs of gear.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 19:41 UTC
In reply to:

User6915810299: There is many cameras professional with full frame sensors. But questions is about professional settings or they use auto modes ?. For example for me I don't need any those professional settings because I always taking pictures in auto modes !. This war I mostly need, just big sensor with good auto modes, full articulated screen, high ISO, time lapse option, 4K video and that is almost it !. I don't even need GPS and I always turning GPS off to safe battery !. Also super zoom fixed lens will be great too but with full frame sensor or even bigger !. Camera makers putting a lot of stuff which majority users never using but all that extra stuff making cameras very expensive for nothing !. By the way FULL frame sensors also to much expensive and CPU is more sophisticated then sensors which is just with many pixels !. Not sensor it self is expensive but all that staff inside which many users never using !. Make new cameras without that stupid extra stuff and cameras with full frame sensors will much less expensive but if someone wants super dupoer staff then they will have options to do that ! By the way about those super expensive professional lenses ? Who can afford that and very heavy too ?!

I'm gonna go out on a limb, and say you may not be the target demographic.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 20:10 UTC

Two Focal lengths is not really a zoom is it?

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 21:03 UTC as 22nd comment
In reply to:

maljo@inreach.com: Well, that's a lot of gear, but image how much the thieves have amassed by now!

I wonder if the thieves have a Loaner Program?

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2016 at 23:36 UTC
In reply to:

Spectro: lovely, now that is different. my sigma 85 1,4 has focusing/af issues and minimal focusing distance is too far. Maybe this will drop the nikkor 85mm f1.4 down some for a replacement. Otherwise this 105 could be a poorman nikkor 200mm f2.

There are no poor men, or women, for that matter, buying either of these.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 08:02 UTC
In reply to:

nokinonacynos: At that price why would anyone buy this instead of the 85mm 1.4? Crop the 85mm to 105mm and you have equiv. f-stop of 1.7. Less than one third stop diff in DOF. With the current crop of high mp cams, a small crop like this would be nothing. The 85mm would be more flexible and with pretty much the same size and weight.

Some of us like 105mm better for portraits.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 07:59 UTC
In reply to:

nokinonacynos: Can't understand why they come out with this instead of a 135mm f/2 VR. This 105 is just a marketing gimmick to claim world's fastest 105.

Good thing we're not discussing it, that would play right into their scheme.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 07:57 UTC
Total: 173, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »