July 29, 2014, 03:42:08 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 - Famateur

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 15
Reviews / Re: Canon 70D review with raw files for download
« on: September 05, 2013, 01:26:39 PM »
Thanks for the review!

While some may differ on the subjective assessments (like noise performance), I found your review to be thorough and thoughtful. It's nice to hear about the small things, too, like the tactile feel of the buttons. I'll probably be getting the 70D as the holidays get close and prices hopefully come down a little, so it's nice to have a good idea of exactly what I'd be getting into.

Downloading the RAW files now...

A bit off topic, but I'm curious why people buy Lightroom if they have Photoshop.

I tried it a few years ago and hated its file management system. Maybe I'm just used to Bridge, but it seems to fit my needs better.

Even Adobe admits Lightroom doesn't do anything that can't be done in Camera Raw. If you use smart objects, they open in Camera Raw and not Lightroom, so you end up using Camera Raw for any smart object edits anyway.

I'm told it has some advantages for batch processing that makes it easier if you are trying to manage large collections, but for a hobbyist, I just don't get it.

What am I missing?

I'm a hobbyist, and for me, it has a lot to do with cost. I can't justify shelling out six or seven hundred dollars for Photoshop, but $99 for Lightroom? Done. In a heartbeat.

Since Lightroom 5 is my first experience with Lightroom, I don't know what it was like when you tried it a few years ago. I became interested after seeing it used in some YouTube videos (Mike Browne, Gavin Hoey, Serge Ramelli -- then the official Lightroom channel). Then I started searching and watching everything I could find about Lightroom 5. About the time I figured it might be the last non-subscription version and that I wanted to get it, Adorama had their $99 deal. I didn't even hesitate, and I'm very, very pleased so far.

I admit, I'm still getting used to the photo management side of things, but the develop module is excellent (for all the reasons others have shared). Going from Picasa with JPEG to Digital Photo Professional with RAW to Lightroom 5, I really feel like I've advanced my ability take a photo and make it far better than I could before.

I'm also looking forward to using the Book module to print some photo books of family vacations and stuff. Not sure I'll ever use the Slideshow or Map modules (at least for now), but the Web module looks interesting for when I get to the point of posting more photos online.

Anyway, Lightroom just seems to pack in a lot of powerful features for a very reasonable price -- especially if you can't afford Photoshop! When I need to do advanced editing, I've been getting by quite happily with GIMP for long enough that it makes it even harder to justify buying Photoshop. Of course, I'd love to have a proper Liquify tool, as I find iWarp a bit clunky, but it hasn't stopped me from turning out some pretty good (at least in my opinion) full-page magazine advertisements.  ;D

With all the "clouds" rolling in lately, I'm just hoping Lightroom has an umbrella and gumboots!

And say you've subscribed for three years, why don't you get to keep the version you are at after every 2 or 3 years even if you quit? (OK, because people would quite and not sign up again for another 2-3 years and repeat is probably why but it sure rots for the consumer.)

That would be a great solution, but of course, they wouldn't do that...unless they get enough guff from customers.

I don't see the silver lining.

I can understand a subscription for a service (like a gym membership or Netflix), but for software? No way. When I install it on my machine, I expect to be able to use it when I want for as long I want.

One thing that really irritates me is Adobe's BS explanation that they had to go this route in order to make it easier for people to get the latest updates and features without having to wait 18-24 months for the next version. Rubbish. They could accomplish this just as easily by releasing service packs and making them available for download. They could even charge for each service pack if they wanted to. That would allow people to use their perpetual license as we have in the past while giving the constant-updaters a way to stay updated. If it was standard license with an optional subscription-based update plan + cloud services, I wouldn't complain at all.

Man am I glad I got Lightroom 5 before it went to the cloud, too. I hope it serves me well for many years. Maybe by then Adobe will retreat on this mandatory subscription hogwash.

I wonder -- how much of this nonsense has to do with the fact that Flash is increasingly being replaced by HTML5?

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Leads in Sensor Tech
« on: September 04, 2013, 01:07:03 AM »
How do we know that they didn't just hold it back in the release pipeline to release it with the 7D?

Just to expand on this a little more, it sounds like the 7DII will be released several months (or even a year) after the 70D. Am I the only one that thinks Canon has more up its sleeve than putting the 70D sensor in a bigger heavier body with more whistles and bells?

I know, I know -- that's essentially what they did with the 60D and 7D (only in reverse?). Maybe I'm getting back to Fire Swamp optimism...  ;D

It just seems like that's a lot of time to wait for an already long-overdue successor to the 7D, and perhaps that time would make more sense to us if we knew that a new sensor tech (or ADC, or whatever) was being tested in conjunction with DPAF. We've all been thinking about the 70D sensor as it is and wondering what Canon might add to it for the 7DII. What if it was the other way around? What if they created the 7DII sensor and then opted to use a lesser "consumer" version with DPAF for the mid-level 70D?

"Rodents of Unusual Size? Personally, I don't think they exist."  8)

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Leads in Sensor Tech
« on: September 04, 2013, 01:06:48 AM »
Of course, not everyone in this forum shares my optimism, particularly after having high DR/noise hopes for the last couple of years and having them dashed. They're like Buttercup, and I'm Wesley as we're fleeing to the Fire Swamp for safety:

Buttercup: We'll never survive!
Wesley: Nonsense! You're only saying that because no one ever has...

What are the dangers of the Fire Swamp?  The High DR spurt, but there's a popping sound from the ADC before that, so those are easily avoided.  Lightening pattern noise, but Aglet was clever enough to figure out what that looks like, so we can avoid that, too.  What about the ROUS?  Resolution of Unusual Suckiness?  I don't think that exists.

LOL! Once again, your wit was faster than my reply to my own post (as evidenced by my other post being after this one). Resolution of Unusual Suckiness! Love it!

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Leads in Sensor Tech
« on: September 04, 2013, 12:52:30 AM »
I hear ya, Unfocused. My opinion (as expressed in another thread) is that Canon chose to concentrate on Live View AF for this generation of sensor. From all the YouTube videos I've seen of the 70D thus far, they pulled it off superbly.

I understand that, to many, Dual Pixel AF appears to be aimed at videographers, and while in practicality, it pretty much is right now, think of what this technology will do for the next mirrorless body!!! That's the first thing I thought of when they announced DPAF. Add a high quality EVF (for those who really want/need it), and you've got a mirrorless body that spanks the competition for auto-focus. I expect a DPAF EOS M will fly off the shelves.

One other thought: we know companies tend to release technology on a scheduled road map. While many are moaning that the DR/noise performance hasn't improved that much in the 70D compared to previous generations, how do we know that they didn't just hold it back in the release pipeline to release it with the 7D?

I know that's optimistic, and I'm perfectly content if they really did focus on just Live View AF, but maybe we should wait to see what the 7DII actually delivers. Just a thought...

Anyway, Canon demonstrated that when it sets out to solve something (like Live View AF), it can succeed. When Canon decides to "solve" the dynamic range and noise "problem", I have no doubt it will be equally successful. I'm excited for Canon.  8)

Of course, not everyone in this forum shares my optimism, particularly after having high DR/noise hopes for the last couple of years and having them dashed. They're like Buttercup, and I'm Wesley as we're fleeing to the Fire Swamp for safety:

Buttercup: We'll never survive!
Wesley: Nonsense! You're only saying that because no one ever has...

 ;D ;D ;D

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's Stock Hit Hard
« on: September 03, 2013, 09:35:07 PM »
Whoops! I also just realized that I replied to a fairly old thread. That's what I get for perusing the message boards themselves instead of just the "hot topic" threads on the home page. D'oh!

More apologies...

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's Stock Hit Hard
« on: September 03, 2013, 09:32:30 PM »
WARNING: I just re-read my post before posting it, and man does it sound like a long, boring lecture! My intention is just to contribute something thoughtful to the discussion that hopefully makes sense and perhaps spawns further thoughtful discussion, so I'm posting it anyway.  :P

And with that...

Which is bad news for us since they will be able to get away with 2005 sensors in 2025 and marketing dribbling out things over 20 years (so far it's been more than 10 years and they still haven't finished dribbling out something as simple, basic, and zero cost as a truly functional AutoISO, certainly not for anything less than 1 series).

A friend of my brother used to work for Sandisk. He couldn't divulge details about what was in the release pipeline but said that we'd be simply amazed at the tech they had ready for prime time but wouldn't be released for a couple of years. Like Sandisk, any tech company that wants to survive in the long term will do this. You have to have years of new tech in the pipeline to stay competitive.

From a business perspective, there are a number of sound reasons to use this strategy:

  • Releasing new generations of tech too rapidly can sometimes make people feel like they just wasted their money because something newer and better just came out. If the expensive new gear is suddenly obsolete, you're less likely to shell out next time (or be tempted to keep waiting for another generation, delaying your purchase -- and revenue to the company).
  • Delaying release of new tech can allow more time to recoup R&D costs, improve production processes and ultimately make products cheaper (how often do we comment about how cheap data storage is these days?).
  • Reserving technology for future release helps to even out the peaks and valleys of advancements in technology from new research. It may be a year or two (or more) before a new technology makes it from research to prototype to mass manufacturing. By waiting to release on a more regular "upgrade path", it masks the varying rate of new development and helps keep the revenue more steady.
  • In most cases, a company tries to capture revenue from multiple markets, often stratified by level of income or discretionary spending. By putting all the whistles and bells in one product, lower markets that represent additional revenue would be lost. Hence, inferior but cheaper products are created to satisfy those market segments.
  • One company can't always predict what technology a competitor will release and when. Having a pipeline of technology in waiting allows the company to respond with something when a competitor advances. In general, market leaders (Canon) can wait and follow a road map, while competitors (Nikon) tend to release new tech more rapidly as they fight for market share (the rapid pace can also bring quality control issues along for the ride).

Of course, knowing and understanding all of this doesn't make it any easier to wait for the next generation of tech to be released! I want it "now" just like most other people.  ;D This is where competition is good for the consumer -- it can sometimes nudge a company to release things sooner than planned.

One thing to remember is that the actual tech a competitor releases isn't necessarily the driver for a company to release something in response. From a business perspective, it's that tech's impact on the company's revenue or market share that tends to drive it. If Canon has technology for sensors with higher dynamic range (I don't know if it does or doesn't), then it would make sense to have it scheduled for release along a planned timeline and only bring it to market sooner if/when revenue and/or market share suffer.

I often see comments in this forum about "the marketing department" crippling features on a particular model or "milking this sensor as much as they can", et cetera. I share the same impatience for new tech that motivates such sentiments, but Canon is a business first. It's not a community of do-gooders seeking to produce the pinnacle of photographic technology in a single device. This is also why, in business, a company is referred to as "it" and not "they".

The role of the marketing department is to identify and understand as much as possible about the people to whom they want to sell products. Individual decisions about which features go in and which are withheld may be informed by that marketing research, but product managers who report to vice presidents and executives make those types of decisions -- not the marketing team. It's a pain, but milking a technology for awhile is ultimately better in the long run for impatient consumers like me.

Whew! If you managed to read this far, you have stamina and a healthy attention span -- and my sincere apologies for putting you through such a long post!

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Finally did a few paying jobs now what?
« on: September 03, 2013, 08:21:25 PM »
KKCFamilyman, thanks for asking the questions. It allowed me to benefit from the responses without having to have thick skin myself. :)

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: September 01, 2013, 09:39:21 PM »
I might even go and...(gasp)...take a photo or two, and...(gasp)...enjoy it! :D
I tried that, but the fact that I have only 11 stops of DR just sucked the joy right out of it.  ::)

Yeah, I've been feeling a little deflated, too, now that I've learned I can't really take photos of much more than pigeons on a concrete overpass on an overcast day. Maybe there's a local support group that can help...

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: September 01, 2013, 07:25:35 PM »
And with that, I am done with this thread, lest I risk becoming a victim of my own signature. Peace out.


I might even go and...(gasp)...take a photo or two, and...(gasp)...enjoy it! :D

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: September 01, 2013, 01:41:25 PM »
No, Pi's been told that someone left a Nikon on the beach and he's looking for it.

Laughed so hard my sides are still hurting! Thanks! ;D

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: September 01, 2013, 01:39:43 PM »
Dear CR Moderators:

This thread should be sufficient evidence that discussions about dynamic range and other sensor performance topics will likely devolve into endless and pointless back-and-forth arguing. While I support the idea of people being free to engage in it, perhaps we could find a way of accommodating it with a little more discretion.

Here are some ideas:

1.) On topics like these, we simply lock the thread once the topic has been sufficiently beaten to death (or has been beaten to death in previous threads).

2.) We create a "Bickering" section of the forum in which discussions like this can be initiated and labored to the satisfaction of all participating (or to which threads that take on such characteristics can be moved). Threads from such discussions would be excluded from the website's home page list of recent topics.

I kinda like option 2 best. It makes it clear to those who don't (or do) want to read/engage-in bickering threads that that's what they're getting when they enter. Excluding it from the recent topics on the home page might help avoid "feeding the trolls", as it were, and prevent the unsuspecting from stumbling onto such drivel.

What do you think?

Other ideas?

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: September 01, 2013, 01:28:19 PM »

LOL...seriously? That's your conclusion to people who see the futility of this silly argument?

You still haven't responded (unless I lost it in the ever-growing volume of pages to this thread -- or was it the other thread?) to my comment and others' comments acknowledging the DR and noise superiority at certain ISO levels of Sony/Nikon sensors. Does your continual ignoring of the fact that for many (most?) photographers DR and noise at certain ISO levels isn't their highest priority mean your head is in the sand?

Sorry, but displaying an image of beating a dead horse in a thread that continues on, unresolved, for 24 pages is a comment about a topic. Implying that those who disagree with you have their heads in the sand is a personal attack. Is that really where you're going to take this? Then again, maybe I got it all wrong. Maybe you weren't accusing but rather admitting? In which case, I apologize.  ;)

Let it go already...

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 15