Lives in United States Boston, MA, United States
Joined on Feb 14, 2009


Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5

The Neo 2 in flash mode (using batteries) is 4 stops less powerful than an Elinchrom D-Lite RX One on it’s lowest setting (6 Ws). At 0.37 Ws it is not remotely close to a Speedlite. Useful for use with fast primes but not bright enough for much else. The Anova Pro 2 looks to be a little more than 5 times as powerful as the Neo 2 putting it at 12Ws. Useful but no where close to a strobe.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2017 at 21:07 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply
On article Photoshop CC: Adobe responds to reaction (1842 comments in total)

Does Adobe really think we are so naive as to not see completely through their talking points. Spin this is much as you want. This move is motivated by profit generation from a captive market. I have little doubt that it will achieve the desired financial outcome over the short term. In the long run, however, Adobe has sent a chilling message to its customers and demonstrated a complete lack of regard for the "hobbyist" community. If they persist on this course I will be taking my business elsewhere and doing my best to convince everyone I know to do the same.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2013 at 14:11 UTC as 440th comment | 1 reply

We need to rally all this passion into a crowd-based response to hit Adobe in the wallet. They obviously view their customers as chumps to be fleeced. They will only respond to this outcry when it hurts their bottom line. Word of mouth has become an increasingly powerful tool in this day and age. I intend to share my displeasure with Adobe as far and wide as the internet will carry my voice.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2013 at 09:56 UTC as 351st comment

Given the investment Adobe has already made in this new direction, I do not think any amount of complaining or protestation will change their path. Rather we must vote with our dollars (euros, etc.).

I for one will seek out alternatives before supporting a software rental model at the rates proposed. With discrete releases, I can choose if the incremental value offered is worth the upgrade price. In the new model, I am asked to pay up every month regardless of the incremental value created by Adobe.

I view this as a financially driven move with no regard for customer wishes. Regardless of the marketing spin, I feel betrayed by Adobe and will register my disappointment by seeking out alternative products.

Link | Posted on May 6, 2013 at 20:01 UTC as 674th comment | 1 reply

From the information available it appears that the "Sport" version of the 120-300mm uses exactly the same glass, coatings, and optical formula as the lens it replaces. As best I can tell, here are the differences:

New external cosmetic treatment (S badge, smoother body lines, different finish treatment)
New foot design.
Compatibility with USB Dock (tweak focus, set focus limit, focus speed, OS mode)
New external switch than can be configured with software.

I am not sure I would pay $600 for these new features when the prior version can be had for $3K and deliver identical image quality (which I can say first hand is extremely good). I am pleased to see Sigma starting to produce some really fine glass and give the big boys something to think about. Can't wait to see how this lens with a 1.4x teleconverter compares to Canon's new $11,000 200-400mm f/4.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2013 at 18:08 UTC as 12th comment | 7 replies
Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5