Yes, please, make AI features subscription-only. So I can ignore them utterly.
Upvote
0
Because 45MP isn't low resolution.So why built a good quality lenses but stick with low resolution ?
Again, you never get the "full benefit" - it's an impossibility, the resolution of a lens-sensor pair is the product of the MTFs of each, each one lowers the overall resolution. The question is whether you get a noticeable increase in resolution on improving the lens or sensor. And, it's clear that the R7 does that in reasonable light relative to the R5 for many common lenses.All im saying is that we might not get the full benefit from 60mp that many people are hoping for, because the lenses also need to be sharp enough for the task.
"Absolutely devastated" by a camera not meeting your wishes?I'm absolutely devastated.
- No higher resolution
- AI bullshitting
- Subscription rip-off
I made the EF -> RF switch last summer temporarily using an R7 and a serious value of RF lenses and planning to buy the R5m2 latest Q1 2024 as was hoped...even now I might need to reconsider switching brands. I'm furious.
You just need it to recognise your face. That's easy as my software remembers faces now.Personally, I'd like to see an AI feature that works with eye auto-focus for small groups. I'd love to see a feature that gets every single eye of the people in a portrait tack sharp at the lowest possible aperture. That would help when I give my camera to somebody else to take a group portrait that I'm in ;-)
Its just a rumor. Lets grab a cup of tea. wait and see. Its just fun to speculate. Its rated CR2, you can get furious when its CR5 ;DI'm absolutely devastated.
- No higher resolution
- AI bullshitting
- Subscription rip-off
I made the EF -> RF switch last summer temporarily using an R7 and a serious value of RF lenses and planning to buy the R5m2 latest Q1 2024 as was hoped...even now I might need to reconsider switching brands. I'm furious.
Microsoft Personal 365 for $70/year strikes me as being a fair deal, particularly when you compare it to what wireless carriers charge for using a smartphone.I feel the same way but Adobe is proof that not everyone feels that way.
I would prefer the Microsoft Office approach where there is a choice between a subscription and a lifetime license.
CR2: This is a rumour that comes from a known source with a track record of giving correct information most of the time, but not always. The information in these rumours do not have a broad consensus from known sources.I'm absolutely devastated.
I'm furious.
Microsoft Personal 365 for $70/year strikes me as being a fair deal, particularly when you compare it to what wireless carriers charge for using a smartphone.
I never think of the future. It comes soon enough.—Einstein.It is really difficult to discuss irrelevant ideas and come to a conclusion. There are 2-3 months until the camera is introduced, so it would be best to see what is going on and evaluate it then.
It will happen, sooner or later.An AI feature id love to see (if its possible) is that the camera automatically detects the best shutterspeed for a sharp image with a moving subject.
Imagine you are photographing a flying bird and the camera automatically selects the slowest possible shutter speed that still gives you a tack sharp image.
This could revolutionize action photography by giving us potentially lower iso numbers and more sharp shots, because it would also correct too slow shutterspeeds.
You are wrong: When you buy a perpetual software license, you do not get ownership of the software. You buy the right to use the software for as long as you wish (i.e. until the software is no longer supported, or the software does not support your new camera, or the software no longer works because the operating system of your computer becomes obsolete, etc.).Subscribing to software at a low price must seem like a fair deal when you've already given up on the idea of ownership, which was the norm less than 10 years ago.