August 20, 2014, 05:25:45 AM

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 - caruser

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
1
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 F/4L IS -- Reviews are trickling in...
« on: July 15, 2014, 12:09:27 PM »
Just took it for a spin in Glacier and Banff. So sharp I never felt the need to get the Zeiss 21mm out of the bag.
Thanks, just what I needed to hear for a severe attack of GAS :-) The perfect companion to my 70-200 f/4 IS.

2
Lenses / Re: DigitalRev review of the new 16-35 L IS
« on: July 04, 2014, 09:07:29 AM »
The "reviews" that Kai makes are not very thorough or balanced, but he occasionally mentions something important. I like watching a video or two of his after to relax after reading some of Bryan's reviews top-to-bottom.

3
Software & Accessories / Re: Apple to Cease work on Aperture
« on: July 02, 2014, 09:38:25 AM »
Thanks!  This bit:

Quote
Today, after weeks of speculation—fueled particularly by beta versions of Yosemite not supporting Aperture

...means Yosemite won't see much use on my Macs for the time being.

Well it's not out yet, and hopefully they'll have Aperture patched up by the time Yosemite is released. I mean, hopefully they didn't use too many of their "secret"/private OS APIs to make it a difficult task!

4
Software & Accessories / Re: Apple to Cease work on Aperture
« on: July 02, 2014, 06:52:42 AM »
Recent news suggests that the Aperture and iPhoto "replacement" will have some kind of plug-in support, I have read "third party extensibility", which might actually open the door to it, with some good add-ons, becoming a valid tool. Time will tell.

Personally I'll have to balance the perhaps not-so-nice, and not-immediately-powerful-enough new photo app from Apple against the licensing and general barf-ness of Adobe's software. I'm really looking forward to that. Not.

If you force developers to use a language nobody else uses (and outside Apple nobody uses Objective-C, and now Apple would like to replace it with the new Swift too) ...
While a more in-depth discussion could be had, it's a bit too off-topic here.

5
Software & Accessories / Re: Apple to Cease work on Aperture
« on: June 30, 2014, 09:00:12 AM »
How is Lightroom on the Mac anyhow? From some years back I remember Adobe software being really crappy Carbon-based legacy-ware, many bugs, slow, unintuitive. Is Adobe software from today state-of-the-art 64-bit Cocoa? With good usability?
Still clunky, but bearable with an SSD.  Native, properly-coded apps are much faster.  Adobe obviously feel no need to update their code for the current decade.  Even DxO has used the GPU for a few versions now.  Adobe seems to have made some minor improvements in usability...⌘-H actually hides the apps now.  :P
Doesn't sound particularly encouraging, even though a 2013 RMBP should be fast enough. "Luckily" I've stopped using case-sensitive file-systems for other reasons, IIRC Adobe software was one of the few that didn't handle a case-sensitive FS correctly. So many signs of bit-rot and badly maintained software.

6
Software & Accessories / Re: Apple to Cease work on Aperture
« on: June 30, 2014, 08:56:35 AM »
How is Lightroom on the Mac anyhow? From some years back I remember Adobe software being really crappy Carbon-based legacy-ware, many bugs, slow, unintuitive. Is Adobe software from today state-of-the-art 64-bit Cocoa? With good usability?
As long as Apple keeps on changing development languages to lock-in application developers it will cause this kind of problems to large, complex applications like Adobe's. Carbon was a C/C++ interface, while Cocoa is Objective-C, and porting from one to the other required a whole rewrite of the user interface code in a very different language.
Slow - this kind of applications usually require enough powerful and fast hardware is you're going to work on large images - CPU, memory and disk.
There are trial versions of Adobe software you can try it yourself. Lightroom user interface is far more intuitive than Photoshop, being designed for the photographic workflow, but as any powerful applications it requires some knowledge of how it is designed and works to really take advantage of it. Don't believe to start it, move some sliders and get great photos...
Anyway if there was software that keep Apple alive before the iPhone it was Adobe software. Without it, Apple would have gone years ago, only the media/graphics market keep it alive thanks to Adobe applications. It's funny how many Apple users complain about Adobe... :)
Cocoa has been around for quite a while, and given the quality of Adobe's code-base they had to do some serious rewritings for 64bit anyhow. I also do not understand the Objective-C and vendor-lock-in argument; it's the technology they inherited with NextStep, and they've been as much hostage to that language and run-time as everybody else!

I will try Lightroom; at first it seemed that the "cloud"-stuff subscription was the only option to get it, but there does seem to be a possibility of buying it, too. I don't mind that it's a professional application that needs some know-how, otherwise I'd be happy using iPhoto, which I'm not.

Regarding the complaining about Adobe: I'm not one of the old-school Apple users, i.e. not a creative guy that has been using a Mac since the pre-OS X days. I never even looked at a Mac before OS X, when suddenly a Mac could do 99% of what a Linux could do, natively :-)

7
Software & Accessories / Re: Apple to Cease work on Aperture
« on: June 30, 2014, 04:16:24 AM »
I am quite shocked as to how many people actually care that Aperture isn't going to be supported anymore. I don't use Aperture, I use Lightroom on the Mac and until a few minutes ago, I didn't know anyone who used Aperture. My understanding is that Aperture hasn't seen an update in quite a while so I guess my question is, why be all upset at Apple now? If you were using Aperture and liked it, keep using it till you can't anymore then migrate.
The people like me who were holding out on Aperture were waiting for "Aperture X", i.e. a complete overhaul of the application like Final Cut Pro and Logic received. Seems that we have to change to Lightroom after all.

How is Lightroom on the Mac anyhow? From some years back I remember Adobe software being really crappy Carbon-based legacy-ware, many bugs, slow, unintuitive. Is Adobe software from today state-of-the-art 64-bit Cocoa? With good usability?

Slow, clunky and completely GPU unaware. Takes for ever to render edited images and lot of spinning beach balls. My fingers are crossed for v6. It's all we can do.
Now that's a let-down. And without competition, how much time and money will Adobe spend to spice things up? Or are there other serious alternatives?

What do other people on a Mac use? How are the new version of Canon's tools? For a long time they used to be even worse than the ones from Adobe...

8
Software & Accessories / Re: Apple to Cease work on Aperture
« on: June 30, 2014, 03:14:49 AM »
I am quite shocked as to how many people actually care that Aperture isn't going to be supported anymore. I don't use Aperture, I use Lightroom on the Mac and until a few minutes ago, I didn't know anyone who used Aperture. My understanding is that Aperture hasn't seen an update in quite a while so I guess my question is, why be all upset at Apple now? If you were using Aperture and liked it, keep using it till you can't anymore then migrate.
The people like me who were holding out on Aperture were waiting for "Aperture X", i.e. a complete overhaul of the application like Final Cut Pro and Logic received. Seems that we have to change to Lightroom after all.

How is Lightroom on the Mac anyhow? From some years back I remember Adobe software being really crappy Carbon-based legacy-ware, many bugs, slow, unintuitive. Is Adobe software from today state-of-the-art 64-bit Cocoa? With good usability?

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 1DX camera
« on: April 24, 2014, 11:33:09 AM »
How reliable is the new Canon 1DX camera ie repair frequency?
I can not imagine a bunch of anecdotal evidence on a forum to give a solid basis for statistical analysis.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: dual pixel tech going forward
« on: April 24, 2014, 11:31:35 AM »
The 'dual pixels' are all split vertically, so if they altered the microlenses and CFA to increase the actual resolution of the sensor, you'd end up with images having a 3:1 aspect ratio.
I think that's not the right way to look at this. It'd be more like having two color channels per pixel in the raw file rather than only one as input to the demosaic.

11
maybe that´s how canon manages to make a profit..... selling flawed gear to fanboys and making millions for repair.
that's capitalism, perhaps one day we as a humanity will have enough of all the lies and manipulations and greed and find something better

12
Publish.
The fundamental difference between GM and Toyota, and Canon, is that faulty cars kill people, a clicking 24-70 is annoying.
You are right, but the connection is not so far fetched, either, since the motivation for such dishonesty will be very similar.

13
Software & Accessories / Re: need help choosing the right macbook.
« on: February 28, 2014, 03:18:49 AM »
I noticed that all but the top MBP Retina only have onboard graphic chips (Iris/Iris Pro) now instead of discrete graphics. Are they as good for graphic editing as the previous version with nVidia cards?
Don't know why Apple had to discontinue the non-retina MBP. Seems like a way to force newer technology even if people don't want it.


Its all about money:

http://www.apple.com/mac/compare/notebooks.html


But here's the strange thing, if you take the smaller of the two standard 15" Retina MacBook Pro configurations and add the CPU and SSD and RAM to match that of the larger one, you have two identically priced machines where one has a discrete graphics chip and the other doesn't!

14
EOS Bodies / Re: sotchi - canon prototypes
« on: February 19, 2014, 07:38:31 AM »
Sorry, should have been more specific as in this is an actual quote from the governing IOC.

"The International Olympic Committee (IOC) enforces strict regulations that protect its corporate sponsors, meaning any brand not sponsoring the Olympics is not allowed to show its logo or otherwise affiliate itself with the lucrative event".
So the brand is not allowed to show its logo, which would mean that Canon or Nikon can't just show up waving flags, but I don't read that to imply that photographers happening to use Canon or Nikon (or whatever) need to cover their logo. What would be next, they need to cover their shoes if Adidas or Nike aren't sponsors?

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 19, 2014, 07:27:14 AM »
The 500D is a nice camera, but Canon's crop cameras do lag behind the FF cameras.  You are probably making the right decision to change cameras and a 5Dii is a smart option for many.  But some 1Ds and 1D models are in your price range and they have some positives, too.

But personally, it wasn't really until I got a FF camera that I realised how immaterial the whole APS-C vs FF debate is.  I'm now using a little APS-C Fuji for much of my photography.  It might be technically inferior to my Canon, but the difference isn't that big and it is better suited to what I do. 

So the only real suggestion I have is to sit back, evaluate your photographic goals, work out where your 500D is deficient and then decide which camera is best suited for your needs.
Even ignoring the image quality, I found just the AF-ON button, the custom-modes, shortest shutter speed, second wheel, top LCD, the view finder etc. a huge plus.

Of course you don't need to go full frame for all of these features, but an older 1-series body as you suggest would have them, too.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9