Do I even need a 50?
Need? No. But want, yes!
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.
Do I even need a 50?
Doesn't the jagged performance shown in
mean that, for the 7D, the base is 100, 125 is pushed from 100, and 160 is pulled from 200?
Unfortunately, no matter how low of a monthly fee you suggest you will never convince the contingent of users who refuse to accept "renting" software. You see, they believe that they "owned" the software when they bought in the past and could use it forever and ever and ever to infinity and beyond. They feel that "Adobe owns you" once you sign up to a subscription model because if you ever stop paying you can't access your old PSD files. And they also fear that once everyone accepts the subscription model Adobe will jack up the prices on us.
NO - what I propose if you lay out $700 for PS, you own a perpetual license. You pay a monthly support fee rather than an annual or 18 month upgrade fee. You can stop paying and keep using the s/w just to be back on the support service you need to pay missed months (either in full if short term or at discount if longer).
My copy of the upgrade is downloading right now. I've been using the beta, the two big differences, the straighten tool and the radial filter are worth it to me.
The fun thing about our legal system is that anyone can do anything they want and your recourse is to sue them and that takes a lot of money and time with an uncertain outcome.
The fun thing about the legal system where I live, is that (in this case) Canon must show monetary loss due to 3rd party firmware before they can sue.
Sounds like CRguy's reference to 1-series bodies is a separate communication from this one. Also, it seems unlikely that ML would state, "The 1-series and Cinema bodies are out of our project scope because we're afraid Canon will sue our pants off if we touch them." (In fact, both reasons are probably true for ML.)
I think I'm missing something here. From the original post it is apparent that Canon doesn't have a problem with ML being run on its Cameras ... why would Canon sue if only for the EOS-1 cameras and not the others? After all, a hack is a hack.
A hack to the 5DIII adds features without hurting Canon's bottom line. A hacked 1D X that functions as a 1D C...Canon doesn't want.
Therefore Canon's response is quite correct and honest. If you install ML and the use of ML damages your camera, they don't have to cover. But if ML is not the cause of the damage, they must honor the warranty.
One thing I don't understand about the post: what does it mean that "only Canon is OK" with that? Other companies will refuse to even touch your camera if you installed a 3rd-party firmware - even if it has nothing to do with the damage?
To my knowledge, I have yet to insult your intelligence, but I do see your point. We all need to go back to being friends. I can potentially see the value in the new model and yet it is no where close to being as valuable to me as I'm sure the Adobe crew has hoped. For my business, this simply is not my cup of tea. I am certainly glad that you and others have shown your support for their product as I believe it is easier to push against the new format than it is to defend it. I, for one, simply hope that we can all get what we desire whether it is a box, digital download, or subscription plan. If that were to happen, I think the rough seas would settle. I'm not holding my breath for that to occur, but we can certainly all have our dreams.
Seriously though, I too am known to be a bit facetious at time, but this is a serious issue facing photographers, and forums like this help us discuss and even put our thoughts into words for the world to hear.
I'm sorry for causing you upset and I agree the first post that had that reference probably crossed the line
As i said i find the extreme group offensive too and hence drawing the parallel as I do find Adobes actions seriously offensive. Perhaps I was a bit flipant with that usage.
However the replacement post had nothing even remotely along this line the most severe word i used in that was "dictatorial" which is a significant step down. I also mentioned that I felt the Adobe net minions roaming the web were treating their customers intelligence with disrespect. I am genuinely at a loss as to why the replacement post would be removed except that it's sensorship (or thought police as unfocused put it) which ironically enough is moving closer to the previously mentioned extreme groups tactics of simply removing any vocal opposition.
WTF? my posts were deleted AGAIN!
There was nothing wrong with the second lot (there was no reference to fascists or nazis)
oh except I wasn't gushing over how I love the new Adobe subscription model
please this level of sensorship is retarded cant he mod that removed my posts
please PM me with a reasonable reason why?
seriously is Adobe paying CR to crush the negative feedback or what?
Not sure what "second lot" you're referring to but the post you made last night deserved to be deleted and if I was the mod I would have banned you from the site.
Seriously? thats a bit extreme
I find fascists offensive too hence the reason i refered to Adobe as such