Jefftan

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Mar 29, 2011

Comments

Total: 689, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Aaron801: This is probably obvious, but if your using an old version that you're happy with, why not just use that thing and not worry about it? You might need another solution if you buy a new camera that isn't supported by the version of LR that you have, but if you're anything like me and don't upgrade gear very often, you might be able to use the next to latest version of the software for a very long time and have no complaints... so it isn't as if you necessarily have to be looking for a replacement right away because you don't love the subscription-only model that they're putting fourth.

I happen to use a pretty old version of Photoshop that for the most part still serves me very, very well...

"and it's annoying enough just after about 3 weeks,"

why> conversion takes too long?

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 22:21 UTC
In reply to:

henrikfoto: The new AlienSkin Exposure X3 has a DAM and is a fantastic tool for editing too.

Is it a RAW developer and if so is it good?

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 22:04 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (932 comments in total)
In reply to:

opiecat: i will no way go into the CC model.
i used to recommend LR, but not with the CC model.

What's a good/better alternative to LR?

Capture One, DXO OpticsPro

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 21:54 UTC
In reply to:

borax: Good news ! McPhun's Luminar costs less than 100€ ! It would be nice to have a comparison review between it and other DAM/Raw Editing softwares like PhaseOne Capture One, DxO Optics pro, ACDsee or DigiKam...

Please share your result in "retouching" forum
many want to know

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 21:50 UTC
In reply to:

borax: Good news ! McPhun's Luminar costs less than 100€ ! It would be nice to have a comparison review between it and other DAM/Raw Editing softwares like PhaseOne Capture One, DxO Optics pro, ACDsee or DigiKam...

I am surprised why something which is so easy to do (assume all in auto default setting)

I mean compare jpeg output from the same RAW file produce by different RAW development program
Search on internet, don't find any recent comparison

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 21:49 UTC

I don't use Luminar and don't know if it is good or not

but Adobe way of doing business disgust me and if it succeeded, others may follow
like Capture One that I use

This affect everyone
any other company that can take business away from Adobe is very welcome

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 21:47 UTC as 8th comment
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (932 comments in total)
In reply to:

KoolKool: i use lightroom for free so i don't care! :D

how? please share

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 05:21 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (932 comments in total)
In reply to:

jerrysdean43: Check out AlienSkinware Exposure 3 and never look back! 30 day free trial, I have tried it and think it is better then LR6. However since I already own Luminar and they are adding DAM to it I will probably stick with it, although Exposure 3 is tugging at me.

Is AlienSkinware Exposure 3 a RAW developer like Capture One?

Is it just a film simulation program?

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 03:21 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (932 comments in total)

If people still don't leave Lightroom
Don't blame Adobe

It is customer's fault

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 03:17 UTC as 245th comment

To u guy all have tons of Lightroom catalog andis now stuck with Adobe?

For me that just start RAW conversion
just got Capture One or DXO OpticsPro and done with it
both excellent especially Capture One (get a 10% online coupon and it cost only $270, 2 years worth of stupid subscription and u own the problem)

Depending on a software to manage a "catalog" instead of just organizing on my hard drive is a strange idea to me

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 17:42 UTC as 147th comment | 1 reply
On article Google Pixel 2 sample gallery (132 comments in total)

image 43 ISO 3675

very impressive for a small sensor

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 02:43 UTC as 12th comment
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: It does look way nice - but here are 2 fails for my needs - 1) No Lens Cap 2) folding Lens Design, it doesn't seem there is a addon Lens Hood being avialable, and even if so - no filter thread for serious photography? And i do fear, the Lens is not being far away (albeit a bit faster) than the 15-45/3.5-5.6 Lens, which was tested by Ming Thein whileas he reviewed the EOS M6 (APS-C also, DSLM) and that lens is really being flawed, to quote Ming here:

https://blog.mingthein.com/2017/10/02/review-the-2017-canon-eos-m6/

"I am waiting for the Panasonic Lumix LX200"

why not RX 100 m5 , if I have to buy a premium compact now it would be
RX100 m5 or LX 9

probably RX100 m5 as I think AF better due to on sensor PDAF

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 07:18 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (411 comments in total)

weather sealing is a lie
to me a waterproof camera is one where I can put it under the tap and no problem

example is Panasonic G85/ Olympus E-M5 II / EM1 II

try it with this Canon and i bet it would instantly die

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 04:37 UTC as 11th comment | 3 replies
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (411 comments in total)

many of use have more camera than we need

If a camera do not get me excited, I won't buy
but this is real boring. Even if u give me one for free it would probably be collecting dust

If the same camera is a real waterproof tough camera than it is another story
I would get really excited and pre-order right away

that weather seal thing is a lie

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 04:35 UTC as 12th comment
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jefftan: my memory is not good
but it seem to me in 2018 up to now Oct 16

there is no significant or groundbreaking camera announce from any company
am I correct or not?

only boring and forgettable one like this

Yes sorry ,my mistake
it is 2017

but any significant or groundbreaking camera in 2017 up till now Oct 16?

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 04:32 UTC

many like me have more camera than we need

if a company want me to buy a new camera, it must make me excited

but this thing is so boring, Just a M5 with kit lens glue on it
no 4k, no Olympus level IS, sensor not comparable to Sony, lens only F2.8 at wide

even if u give one to me for free, I don't know if I will use it
it will just collect dust like some of my other camera

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 03:51 UTC as 25th comment | 2 replies
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

Madden: I keep hoping to find a smaller replacement for my LX100 with a bit more reach while keeping a good deal of its physical manual controls, the built-in level, its bright lens and 4k Video for less than $1000. Higher resolution, touchscreen and better jpg engine would be appreciated bu are not mandatory to me.

But it doesn't seem to happen, even after almost 3 years now. So I keep taking the LX100 on my multi-day hikes / bicycle travels and keep missing more reach and less weight while loving the combination of sensor size and bright lens...

not really, LX 100 only 12 MP
also how is the IS?

my understanding is not very good like the latest IS in G85
for small sensor to use lower ISO, IS very important

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 03:43 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rick DeBari: I'd much rather have a Lumix DMC-G85 with the 12-60 OIS kit lens than this thing. Much more bang for the buck, shoots 4K and $300 less at $998 w/lens. Also huge M4/3 lens system options available. Yes, this is a compact with big sensor under 1 lb weight but the lens is a slow f-stop and zoom is too limited. For $300 less the G85 is much more versatile, even though its only 16mp. The G85 kit lens is a 24-120mm equivalent. The G1 X Mark III looks very nice but is way too expensive for what you get.

G85 is also true waterproof I believe
can run camera under tap and still function

Not like this Canon

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 03:39 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

morepix: It feels like someone has moved April Fools' Day to October!

agree, this thing $1300?

more like $500-600 at most

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 03:38 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (411 comments in total)

my memory is not good
but it seem to me in 2018 up to now Oct 16

there is no significant or groundbreaking camera announce from any company
am I correct or not?

only boring and forgettable one like this

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 21:46 UTC as 22nd comment | 2 replies
Total: 689, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »