Lives in United States Dallas, United States
Joined on Sep 8, 2004


Total: 53, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article Photoshop CC: Adobe responds to reaction (1841 comments in total)

Yep, confirmation they're abandoning photographers and only providing old and or dumbed-down versions of the software I (used to) use. Hopefully another company will be able to pick up the slack.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2013 at 00:40 UTC as 806th comment

Guess that's the end of Photoshop for me - no way in h*ll I'm paying a monthly fee to use it :/

Link | Posted on May 6, 2013 at 18:36 UTC as 750th comment

So cool - I bought Color EFex a couple years back, and now I have the whole suite for free :)

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2013 at 00:47 UTC as 71st comment
On article Nikon posts sample images from new D7100 (95 comments in total)

That second / middle shot is stunning - be sure to check it out full-sized.

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2013 at 20:27 UTC as 35th comment
On article Hands-on with Fujifilm's X100S (62 comments in total)

I love it - I know they can't retrofit the Digital Split Image and faster focus to existing X-E1, etc., as those are hardware-enabled, but hope they give us a firmware update for focus peaking, which can certainly be done with the existing hardware :)

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2013 at 21:59 UTC as 32nd comment | 1 reply
On article Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM preview (149 comments in total)

I was *very* happy with the 24-105 when I shot Canon - can't imagine paying $600+ more for shorter focal length. What were they thinking?

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2012 at 22:59 UTC as 28th comment | 1 reply
On article DxO Labs unveils Optics Pro 8 with Smart Lighting (35 comments in total)

Some of the new / updated features look like real improvements (Smart Lighting, enhanced detail / sharpening, etc.) - I've recently re-instated DxO 7.x in my workflow, and look forward to the new version :)

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 17:51 UTC as 24th comment
On article Shooting with the Leica M9-P (620 comments in total)

I checked out an M9 at a local camera shop to see what all the fuss was about. It was a lovely experience: the camera is clearly a fine piece of work, the rangefinder experience is enchanting and the lenses are to die for. But it's also heavy like a brick, has no hand grip to speak of, and has a *very* noisy sensor which was outclassed even when it was released.

I just can't buy into the idea of an $8k camera (no matter how seductive the look and feel) with a fixed, antiquated sensor. Unless you simply have money to burn, it doesn't make sense with a device you'll need to upgrade every 2-3 years.

Link | Posted on May 6, 2012 at 15:16 UTC as 143rd comment | 5 replies
On article First Impressions: Using the Nikon D800 (307 comments in total)

I was thinking I was going to sit out this round - but now that I've seen the actual output and had a chance to play with it, I may actually go for the D800(E). Downsampled to 16MP (which I would want to do anyway, 'cause who needs those honkin' files!), the D800 has virtually identical noise characteristics to the D4 but much better detail retention. So you get the best of both worlds: great high ISO performance when needed, incredible detail when needed, even a good-sized DX crop mode. I like it.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2012 at 21:17 UTC as 123rd comment
On article Just posted: Nikon D800 test samples (423 comments in total)

Very nice. Especially instructive to take the raws and compare with D4 *at the same output size* (e.g., 16MP). In this scenario, D800 noise performance is virtually identical with the D4, but retains more detail. If I were buying, I"d get the D800(E), shoot raw, and downsample all my high ISO shots to 16 (or even 12) MP - best of both worlds.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2012 at 13:41 UTC as 46th comment | 1 reply
On article Just Posted: Nikon D4 Studio Test Samples (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

lensberg: The Nikon D4 is essentially an overhyped camera... but i suppose that was to be expected considering the fact that it was propped up prematurely to assume the high ISO crown from the D3S.

Considering the fact that there is a 2½ year time span between the D3S & D4 ... Nikon seem to have made virtually no advances regarding ISO performance...

Just look at that furry patch that resembles tiger skin at ISO 6400 on the D4 and you'll notice severe ammounts of noise reduction at work... blurring out the fine textures & fibres completely... by contrast the D3 & Canon 1D Mark IV manage to preserve the textures whilst delivering a natural looking image...

The intricate pattern on the green & purple fabric is totally smeared out by the D4 though funnily the white cross fibres remain intact ... Now compare it to the D3s sample which is excellent... even the 1D IV manages to retain more detail...

You must be looking at the JPEGs, the NEFs tell a completely different story. The D4 retains quite a bit more detail and better color accuracy than the DS3, pretty much across the board, and is comparable in noise when viewed at the same resolution.

Looking at the 1D Mark IV, though, I'd say there's not much to choose between the D4 and 1D Mark IV, given appropriate noise reduction and sharpening, etc.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2012 at 22:15 UTC
On article Just Posted: Nikon D4 Studio Test Samples (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

ivan1973: D4 is definitely no better than D3S despite having a larger sensor. Can't wait to see 1Dx performances.

HowaboutRAW, showing your ignorance of raw processing software? Nikon Capture NX 2 2.3.1 has been out for some time and, *yes* we do have the raws and have been working with them, thank you.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2012 at 21:58 UTC
On article Just Posted: Nikon D4 Studio Test Samples (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

rhlpetrus: To those that are seeing the D3s better, check these larger crops side-by-side, including colors and detail:


Yes, D4 is virtually identical to D3s in the normalized versions, but with better color accuracy and detail retention. Nice little upgrade - not counting all the new features, which makes it a *big* upgrade ;)

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2012 at 16:35 UTC
On article Just Posted: Nikon D4 Studio Test Samples (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

rhlpetrus: For those that still think D3s is better, check the shadows behavior at base ISO (CNX2):


That's pretty dramatic :)

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2012 at 16:33 UTC
On article Just Posted: Nikon D4 Studio Test Samples (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

hyperthreading: I have a question.

Why were the tests made ​​with the Nikon 85 f/1.8? They should be made ​​with the Nikon 85 f/1.4.

If you are testing a Nikon high-end camera that costs $6000, should you not be testing it with the best Nikon lens which costs $2200? Why was it tested with a midrange lens which costs $500?

Cameras should be tested with the best lenses.

The 85 f/1.8 is sharper than the 85 f/1.4, according to Nikon MTF charts.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2012 at 16:04 UTC
On article Just Posted: Nikon D4 Studio Test Samples (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

atamola: The D3s is clearly better than this pre production D4. There is no question about that.
It's amazing. Really amazing: only 4 extra MP and 2 years later and (according to this samples) Nikon haven't figured out how to improve over the D3s.

Processed from raw, downsized to 12MP, D4 is identical to D3s (if not ever so slightly *smoother*). I think it's remarkable they managed to keep it that close with 1/3 more resolution.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2012 at 16:00 UTC
On article Just Posted: Nikon D4 Studio Test Samples (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: Interesting point about the trialware version of Nikon's Capture NX 2--yes fully updated:

The trialware version of Capture NX 2 does NOT open D4 raw files. Don't think that I want to pay Nikon for a capacity my copy of Photoshop CS5 will have in a few weeks, I hope.

Also makes me wonder about those claiming to have looked at these raw files with Capture NX2.

Hope someone from Nikon USA is reading this string of comments.

The latest version of Capture NX2 (2.3.1) absolutely *does* open and edit D4 files. I have it and used it to look at these NEFs.

Wonder why there's such a controversy about this? I've read several snide comments about whether or not people could actually view the raw files. The answer is, "yes" :/

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2012 at 15:48 UTC
On article Just Posted: Nikon D4 Studio Test Samples (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: Question: Where are all of the people claiming to have downloaded and opened the D4 RAWs getting the software to extract these D4 RAWs?

Has Nikon updated its raw extraction software? Adobe hasn't.

(Yes, I know that some are commenting based on looking at the detail box of DPReview's posted image; this question is not addressed those taking that approach.)

Yes, Nikon released updated versions of its software a while back.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2012 at 05:45 UTC
In reply to:

klopus: Much ado about nothing. There are zillion of apps like it on the App Store already and for a long time. Just check Camera+, Camera Pro, King Camera, etc. I'm sure there are analogues on Android market. Camera Awesome also seems to lack stabilizer which all of the mentioned apps (and others) have.

No, it has image stabilization. Click the little "up" arrow next to the shutter button, and it lets you choose between single-shot, stabilized single shot, touchscreen shutter release, burst mode etc.).

Link | Posted on Feb 29, 2012 at 19:18 UTC
Total: 53, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »