lb77

I really don't like the simulation at all, the transition of focus and out of focus is terrible, but I admit it is also because I am used to photograph with optical shallow dof. So people without a trained eye might not even notice the difference or find something artificial in the simulation.

I think DP Review is credible and this article aims at beginners who are normally lost, trying to understand what's best for them. In that sense I find this article a bit "irresponsible". It over simplifies some very complex, expensive and subjective choices. Many (if not all) choices and statements are disputable

Amazing shots. Loved his contextual landscape + wildlife approach. Very delicate and refreshing, many elements to deal with, composition, light, context... Wildlife photography can get very boring after the 534th shot of an eagle flying or an owl face close up. It's also humbling, not only he has talent and only 22yo, but you get the sense of the patience needed for wildlife. I've seen docs on pros who shoot for BBC Wildlife and it's amazing. They spend months, sometimes years, to make a good movie, waiting, waiting, and waiting...

I like the concept. I think it makes a lot of sense as a product, though it needs some sort of seamless connection to stuff like instagram. I personally am yet to have a pleasant experience trying to share pics from my cameras with my phone through wi-fi.

Very smart concept. I like the price being so low that hispters will not bother to ask for refunds when they discover their unable to achieve the same photos marketed on kickstarter (which, btw have the disclaimer: "The above photo is for reference only. It just intends to illustrate the style and mood to be delivered". I see people here talking like purists defending this against others who are suppose to be the snobs (i suppose i must be one), like if this wasn't an extremely pretentious toy and not the other way around. I would rather advise someone to get a honest 2nd hand digital camera for that money, even if it was ugly or uncool. Alternative is to get an old film camera for less than 100$ and some real film rolls. A very hipster friend of mine gets amazing beautiful results with her old cheap camera and lens and out of date film. She gets the results they are marketing.

It's either portrait or photojournalism. If I have to know the back story to evaluate a photo, it's not portrait, it's photojournalism, it requires meta information. The first two are ok as pure pictorial portraits. Specially the girl on the bus. The robot shot is not really that good. I understand it's interesting as a subject, but the shot is very bland. None of those 3 shots would make into the portfolio of top getty or magnum pros.

The point and shoot is being replaced by smartphones. If you want to know more about it, here is some good info (http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2014/06/09/mirrorless-cameras-and-premium-compacts-are-on-the-rise-despite-a-shrinking). However: "at the same time, however, premium compacts with advanced features such as larger sensors and large-aperture lenses have been on the rise, gaining strongly in popularity. "

I could keep a standalone version of LR and update it every 2 or 3 years depending on what they offer new. I really like LR and I have a ton of sunk costs on presets, collections, editing... But with a subscription model a few years from now i will have even more sunk costs and I will be even more vulnerable and bounded to whatever adobe choses to do. Still, it's cheaper than Capture One Pro. So the move is not easy to make yet.

"only loose"? The core of my work with LR is using the develop module to process images. It would become almost useless for me.

I'm aware that files don't have to be raw. That's not the point. As for 2, If they invest resources to meet mass market it means that they didn't invest in useful features for serious photographers or at least, not as much as they could have. I can think of quite a few things to improve or add to Lightroom. I've read plenty of reviews from people that moved from Capture One to LR and they are lagging in some departments. And now they will be lagging more: no stand alone version. This alone will tremendously boost competitors.

"The new reality of photography [is one] where users tend to take a lot of their photos on their phones - and take a lot more images in general. [Many of them want] a powerful tool that allows them to communicate but doesn’t require them to spend a lot of time to learn." - Adobe Director of Product Management Tom Hogarty (took the quote from the other article). Besides being a very depressing quote it's also a strategic mistake. Adobe core should be the pros or very enthusiastic amateurs / artists. I embraced the "digital darkroom" concept "developing" raw files myself and carefully editing, selecting and archiving when I started to have more interest in photography. No amateur I know of that takes tons of photos with a mobile phone or cheap camera will ever want to develop raw files or edit that much paying for it or even spend time learning about it. There are hundreds of apps like instagram covering that ground and software like picasa, google photos etc. For free.

Good article, I totally agree. I bought the stand-alone version of LR6 already suspecting they would do something as stupid as this... its not a surprise. I would surely eventually upgrade (and pay for that upgrade) to LR7 or LR8 if worthwhile. Adobe has too much of a monopoly in this industry. Time to look for alternatives like capture one. What makes me frustrated is the amount of presets I bought and developed and that are not available for capture one.

Still own a iphone 4s :(

I don't think the noisy lens motors are a problem for filming because focusing is mostly manual in any serious work (sometimes recurring to follow focus and a 2nd person focusing), never by AF. Also sound capturing devices are far from the lenses and not using the camera microphones.. A simple shotgun directional mic on the hotshoe would probably make that problem irrelevant.

Before all, the price in europe seems strangely high. Price of the d850 is about 3500 pounds = 3800 euros. In dollars that makes almost 4500$. I see it for pre-order at 3300$ in the US (BH Photo). 1200$ more for europe, 36% difference. The d180 costs about 1830 pounds in europe = 2000 euros = 2360$ dollars. Yet it costs 2800$ in the US, 18% less for europe. So I don't understand why the price differences in opposite directions, taxes and exchange rates can't explain that. Maybe it's temporary, related to demand and availability. I think it is important to keep this in mind when reading comments and reviews. Perhaps for 3300$ the specs are good, but for 4500$ they wouldn't be so great, so people complain or praise accordingly. Please correct me if i got my prices wrong.