April 18, 2014, 05:08:28 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - drs

Pages: [1] 2
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom Mobile Version Official
« on: April 08, 2014, 12:26:03 PM »
I canceled the CC -- I'm not a subscriber -- that I know now, but I have had to try it.

It is too sad that ADOBE forces us to leave them alone, or pay (until "you" die).

Old arguments, I know, but no new options.

CC=Closed Chapter -- After two decades I'm stuck with Cs6 Master Suite.

PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G16 Announced
« on: August 23, 2013, 01:44:46 PM »
Certainly not a bad camera, but with a fixed screen it lowers my need drastically to update our little G12 here at all.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D L Announced, Shipping in May
« on: April 01, 2013, 11:51:08 AM »
Fantastic, I'm not a left-hander, but this is perfect for all Stereo Photographers. (They didn't say that, but that was the main target. )

The camera has options to sync the lens and other functions for that.

The handles are perfect for this - when mounted in pairs - to take movies with it, no extra gear needed, just the "Canon "Bridge 04/01" to get both mounted.

It's only to sad that this is only today available and the next order can go placed in exactly one year. ;o)

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35 f/2 IS Resolution Test
« on: December 15, 2012, 10:55:44 AM »
Am I surprised? Yes and no, I can't really tell, will say I'm more confused about this result.

I not surprised as Canon has a gap in the Pro CN line - no 35mm and no plans in the near future to fix that. So, if they had something great to offer, why wouldn't they share that with new Semi-Pro L Lenses?

I'm surprised based on the great pancake lens 40mm which is at AMAZON now around $149. One would expect that any new 35mm F/1.4 or F/2.0 would be just a great lens. (especially after two great new zoom lenses 24-70/70-200 as well) A leading 35mm lens was my expectation.

It's after all just a 35mm F/2 lens, we are not talking here about problems to build a 17mm, F/1.4 lens, right?

Too sad, to be honest. Sigma is not really an option for me. I like to use the lenses as well for video, and intercut with different brands can cause trouble (no color match, different overall look and feel etc.)

If I have to stop down, what is the point to buy a faster lens in the first place?

OK perhaps next year -- Canon. ;o)

Lenses / Re: List of rumored lenses
« on: November 04, 2012, 03:11:35 PM »
If it is for film-makers, make it manual, super sharp wide open, and nearly no breathing. ... and a stable image while rack focusing.

For anything else most of us have already glass with lower F stops. Having said that, I would love to have the double f stop of the 1/1.2, but 1/1.4 is fine, 1/2.0 would be the next, and half of the light performance, which makes not really sense to have a prime then (for my personal needs of course, using 1/2.8 zooms).

But I guess, this wish plays too much into the area of the new Cine-lenses which are $4,990 for the T 1/1.3 50mm.

Canon General / Re: Canon's MAP Pricing Goes Into Full Effect Today
« on: November 01, 2012, 11:24:13 AM »
If I get this right, I might delay the replacement of my 5Dm2 and some lenses like the 24-70L.
These were scheduled for this quarter, but perhaps I should "focus" on something else for a while.
The 5Dm2 is certainly good for another year.

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon TS-E 24 f/3.5L II
« on: October 04, 2012, 05:56:26 PM »
Thanks for taking the time to read and answer. This is one of the few lenses that makes really fun for video. It is a great lens. The sharpest lens I own.
In video use, lenses fall very fast apart in terms of usability. If used like still lenses (e.g., no rack focus) they perform mostly excellent, sometimes even better than special Cine-lenses, go figure.

YES, I totally agree to focus on only things where your main expertise is. I might have to find a better way to express my wish. Perhaps that needs two reviewers. Nevertheless: we all have no money to waste, and to invest in glass is certainly expensive. To buy again is not fun. Knowledge and information about a lens helps to save money, because you might know a little bit better what to buy and what not. I use Canon L glass for my 4K film work and knowing the (cine) limitations of the glass makes me perform very well with it.

Thanks again, great review. I look forward to more. (Even focused on Still use only.)

Full disclosure: I don't shoot video. So any review I'd have based on video would be worse than a guy who did, I'll leave video to video guys doing reviews; they're more qualified.  I want to express the "feel" of a lens more than the specs. It's hard to get away from them though, which is why they sneak up, but I want to stay away from precise measurements, from too many comparisons (though inevitable). I want to approach each lens from my own day-to-day working experience and qualify it under those parameters.    That said, when I notice things, like the focus and zoom rings on the new 24-70 f/2.8 L II, I'll definitely include them in my review.

Thanks so much!

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon TS-E 24 f/3.5L II
« on: October 04, 2012, 02:48:25 PM »
This is a great lens and I love this one.

For stitching panoramas (two or three shots), one has to shift the camera (not the lens). Yes, this was already mentioned above, but the review should have had an point here to address it to Canon, that a mount-option is missing for that. This mount-option would save 50% of the work that needs to be done right now, which means the need to move the camera after shifting the lens. (Time is critical for some objects to shoot, so this double work is not fun).

If Canon Rumors continues to review lenses, (thanks and very much appreciated), please include some points how usable a lens for video work is. Is the lens breathing while adjusting the focus, did the color matches with other lenses from the series, is the image stable while pulling the focus or even zoom. How is the focus ring set up, very short on the end or very wide. Important points I think, and most lens reviews ignore that point.

Thanks for a nice review.

Hey Marsu42,

Yes Aldus and Macromedia, but if you take a look how many products they have now. Incredible, and I believe the reason why they lost focus.
I wish Apple would not focus on consumers so much (I love Apple) but the current development (FCPX) is scary.

Lets hope that Adobe is soon out of its growing pain and put more engineers on the software, than product manager.

Take care.

Hey Marsu42,

Thanks for the reply, I felt a little bit bad about my rant, but obviously I'm not alone. In my very own fantasy Adobe has everything ready to go, but release only as much as needed to get us wanted to have the next update.
Well, fantasy, the reality is, I can't really dive into my mood about it, as they really have a monopoly on it, and to stay healthy, "one" has to get comfortable with those things, ...but a little bit barking from time to time is needed :o)
If I had only a Curve-adjustment-layer in 32bit, I would be so much happier (Hey Adobe, check out The Foundries NUKE! They know how to do stuff like that, and it works!)

Have a good one

Adobe will only get worse, because they've got a rock solid monopoly now - think of their refusal to fix security issues in CS5.5 until the community and press echo made them think otherwise. But it is indeed atypical of them not to buy out or integrate the competition into their product line, I guess Photomatrix is too good at what it's doing that Adobe couldn't follow.

Tiff as 32bit/c, seriously... (nearly) everyone in the VFX or Professional world dealing with HDR on a daily basis is using OpenEXR.
Well, I 'm glad they did not used the 4*8bit/c RGBE or ".hdr" (radiance) format, that would be really horrible.

I might sound not fair here, sorry about that, but when will Adobe arrive in the 32bit/c float age? With that I have in mind that everything, e.g., filters and tools, are able to work with 32bit/c float.

HDRI is certainly one of the most promising options these days. It is in use all over the place, but to work properly with it, 3rd party applications are needed, e.g. PhotomatixPro, which is great and I wonder why Ps or Lr misses out so many of these workflow option.

End of Rant  ;) Sorry about that again, eruptions like that happen to me more an more, using Adobe stuff since 2 decades by now: I'm growing impatient ;o)

Finally, we can use color filters again like in the old days, without blocking the light up to 75% of Bayern pattern, and make the images blurry with an e.g., red filter.

But $8K, certainly not my idea for such. Since we can't update the camera on the cheap with a new film emulsion, like in the old days, which was the fun of new developments.

I'm not certain how many people will take one. (A 36MP camera has the same options to illuminate 18MP with out filters [we can argue about that of course, but well...] ... and cost nearly the same.)

I would love to have one of these, but I think my limit would be $2K for it. Just my two cents. Leica or not...

I guess (fear) you're right, Merlin_AZ.

Reminds me on Macromedia, if the Macromedia Director was old (2 years!), no update (as you needed win and mac versions to make things work, that was quite expensive. I stopped just offering this stuff to my clients, never regret it.

Yes, I was so annoyed from Macromedia that I stopped buying for my company this stuff. Only to notice later that Adobe bought them.  :(
I have skipped any uneven Illustrator update (which was great -- 7 and especially 9 was buggy), which worked fine. Now they got us with this practice. I was a big fan boy of Adobe  in the '90s, that time is gone for good.

Those of you wanting to skip over CS6 might need to reconsider.
You will probably need to have CS6 to upgrade to CS7.
That's been hinted.

The only thing that I really love on Ps6 is the new interface, that fits so much more to my pro apps (NUKE, etc.)

Which app?

Aperture or Lightroom both have it's strength in fast image editing (mainly color correction as well as enhancements) and especially in the management of these.

Photoshop is a "Swiss Knife" for image work, not even close a management tool (well, Adobe Bridge might remedy a little bit of the management needs) but the main focus is in the image manipulation and compositing of images.


I certainly suggest to spend $25 on Lynda.com for a single month, and get for any tool that you mentioned more than enough of training and examples. (I'm not connected nor in any contact to Lynda.com, but it is the most "bang for the buck" you can get)

Everyone has a personal workflow or target, and sometimes one tool is stronger than the other for individual needs. No one can really tell you precisely what need, without knowing your day by day needs.

After using Photoshop since 19 years and After Effects since 16 years, similar to the rest of the suite (before I bought all separately), I do not see an advantage in Cs6, as I use 3D tracking applications and one of the bigger 3D packages. I'm rather disappointed.

I might jump this real ease, as I'm quite happy with Cs5.

Photoshop seems more like a patchwork with parts of all the other applications in the Production suite and Lightroom, I can't really see (for my personal use) anything that I need, and pay $700 for the update (ProductionSuite).

The Blur tool is a nice toy, and the name Tilt-Blur shows me that the developers have no idea how a shift lens work. These fakes are cheap, from my point of view. Honestly, the package-design doesn't meet my taste either, which is a minor point, but the Ps box looks rather ugly.

Sorry Adobe you missed to adress my needs: 32bit/channels with no exceptions, it is a long time that "we" ask for that! See you in 2013 or 2014 hopefully with a production ready Cs7.

Pages: [1] 2