Just one more reason to stay far away from Adobe products (except - perhaps - the free ones). And as far as LR goes, it's only a question of 'when', not 'whether' Adobe does the same with it.
G6 - Strange combination of advanced features that would appeal to the technical savvy user but an obsolete sensor that will turn those same users off. I can only guess that Panasonic was afraid that a significant sensor upgrade from the G5 would hurt sales of the GH3.
mpgxsvcd: The dpreview comments make it sound like this lens will act like an F2.8 lens for light gathering. It will act just like an F1.8 lens for light gathering.
You're quite right. An f/1.8 lens is an f/1.8 lens, whether it covers APS-C, FF, or MF. F-stop is a ratio between the focal length and the size of the maximum aperture opening. I'm most surprised DPR doesn't seem to understand that - and it makes me wonder about their reviews. ;-)
Interesting, but still no attached GPS unit to write GPS data at time of exposure. No options to add EVF or hot-shoe external flash.No GPS is SOP for m4/3 (one reason I've stayed away), but the lack of reasonably-priced external flash option seems strange if Panny is really aiming this at more sophisticated users as well as less sophisticated ones. As, to a lesser extent, does the lack of an EVF.(The FL-360L is priced at US$270 at B&H. I can't see many adding a unit of that price to the GF6.)
The kit lens already looks huge compared to the body. Wonder what a 500 would look like?
DavidVogt: Lovely, I bought this program for $20 and now there won't be any updates. Thanks, Google!
From the Google Official Blog:"Beginning today we’ll no longer sell or provide updates for Snapseed Desktop for Macintosh and Windows"
Seems perfectly clear. And yes, updates to OS and/or other system components mean that at some point the desktop version of Snapseed will stop working.
And do some still think that the rest of the Nik programs for desktop are going to stay around? That would be a triumph of hope over experience."Do not ask for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for Nik software ... ." (With apologies to John Donne.)
SantaFeBill: Quote from the review:" we calculated a focal length multiplier of about 1.07x ..."
Can someone explain how _multiplying_ the focal length by 1.07 _decreases_ the focal length?
According to my calculator, 50 x 1.07 = 53.5.
Even if you think DPR doesn't know the difference between multiplication and division, and divide 50 by 1.07, you still don't get the values for reduced focal lengths stated in the review.
Apparently somewhere in the process '0.71' got turned into '1.07'. ( And then there was the multiplier value of '1.09' mentioned earlier in the review)
Thanks for the clarification. As you say, we need to specify whether we mean 'physical focal length' or '35mm equivalent focal length'.Guess I've been around photography so long that I always read 'focal length' to mean the physical measurement, as was safe in the old days.
Quote from the review:" we calculated a focal length multiplier of about 1.07x ..."
Sanpaku: The 150mm f/2.8 will be tempting for hiking/travelling/weight conscious wildlife photographers, especially if Panasonic also make a sharp 2x teleconverter (preferably with integrated tripod mount). Alas, still not DSLR competitive for sports til Olympus or Panasonic does on sensor phase detection focusing.
The 42.5 f/1.2 would have been interesting to me before I discovered how nicely the 75 f/1.8 simplifies portrait backgrounds, if you have enough space.
A Gh3 + the Panny 150 f/2.8 will weigh only a half-pound less than the D600 + the Nikon 300mm f/2.8? I don't think so ... . :-)
Once more with feeling ...In response to what seems to be a misunderstanding that has shown up in several posts here (and I see in others on DPR):
An f/2.8 lens is an f/2.8 lens, period. F-values are a measure of the size of the aperture vs.the focal length of the lens. Or: Fstop=focal length/aperture. These are the _only_ two factors determining a given f-number. The size of the sensor that the lens will cover is irrelevant as far as the f-stop is concerned.
So a FF 150mm f/2.8 lens mounted on an m4/3 body via an adapter will have exactly the same maximum f-stop as an m4/3 lens on that body, provided the adapter doesn't change the effective focal length of the FF lens. (Assuming the lenses are correctly spec'd by the makers.)
Actual light transmission is measured in T-stops, of course, which is why pro video shooters use lenses calibrated that way.
If you want more detail, of if you think I'm wrong, Google 'f-stops' or 'f-number' and read the articles.
90mm f/1.2 and 300mm f/2.8 (35mm focal lengths equivalents) at prices. whatever they will be, far less than their FF equivalents! Although the apparent lack of O.I.S. seems a most strange omission, as it would make using these lenses - esp. the 150 - with an Olympus body the more obvious choice.
A prediction: IF some maker can come up with a m4/3 body that has continuous AF as good as, say the Nikon D7000, AND has GPS capability, either built-in or add-on, m4/3 will replace the DX format systems for many users.It's only the lack of these two things that has kept me in DX.
Of course, FF and MF shooters will likely stay with these formats for the IQ advantages.
BSHolland: I'm a bit confused about 500px Terms of Service, with regards to licensing & sublicensing. (English is not my mother tongue).
500px claim the "right to sublicense". But only "in connection with the Services".From my understanding, sub licensing is only necessary when it is NOT in connection with the services.
So what's the point in phrasing it like that?
+1 on that. ;-)
Just curious - Why is the site referred to as '500px'? The posted logo is _clearly_ '5' plus the infinity symbol, so why is it not '5infinity'? Is 'px' mathematical shorthand for the infinity symbol?And where do the two '0's' after the '5' come from?
In short, how do you get from '5infinity' to '500px'?
Doug Pardee: Instagram's Kevin Systrom has responded:
"it was interpreted by many that we were going to sell your photos to others without any compensation. This is not true and it is our mistake that this language is confusing. To be clear: it is not our intention to sell your photos. We are working on updated language...
"The language we proposed also raised question about whether your photos can be part of an advertisement. We do not have plans for anything like this and because of that we’re going to remove the language that raised the question. ..."
"Nothing has changed about the control you have over who can see your photos. If you set your photos to private, Instagram only shares your photos with the people you’ve approved to follow you. ...
"Please stay tuned for updates coming soon."
What's confusing about "without any compensation to you"?But I think they may have realized they made a mistake, and are looking for a way to back down.
Wonder how long before lawsuits start over some photo of someone's attractive wife/daughter/girlfriend showing up in a come-on for a men's magazine, I'd hope that the person or persons bringing the suits could wring Facebook dry (as in shut the doors) for invasion of privacy, as I'm not sure that any agreement for unlimited use would protect against invasion of privacy of a non-public figure. (If you're a Ms. K. it's different of course.)
whyamihere: I'm thoroughly enjoying the public freakout now that the legal language that has represented this service (and others) is being phrased in terms that normal people can understand.
Since it's part of my job to read the complete ToS for many apps and services, none of this is surprising at all to me.
One of these days, you'll all learn to read the agreements instead of hastily clicking the 'I Agree' or 'Ok' button. In this case, any service that offers to relocate your data for ease of access reserves the right to use, change, or delete your data. It's still yours, but you don't have as much control over what happens to it once that data hits their servers without their consent. That's how it works, and that's how it has always worked.
I'm not sure that 'any service' reserves these rights. If you see a post by Malch (sp?) alerting us to this policy, he also says that Yahoo tired this some years ago and then backed off in face of protests. In any case, this is why I don't relocate any data - unless that includes e-mail, which I long ago assumed was fair game - to any on-line service. I would say esp. photos or any writing I care about.They stay on my computer, with good sw and hw firewall protection. I'd _never_ use an on-line backup service.
Thanks so much for doing this challenge. Rt.66 has so many memories for me.The images bring them alive again.
qwertyasdf: YES!! What a blast! With Sony leading the show with the worlds first compact FF, Fuji x-e1, Sigma lenses (so looking forward to the 35 1.4), also Samyang bringing out (finally) a UWA for apsc.
And above all, we have witnessed the birth of history's fugliest camera - The Hassssselblad Luuuuuuuunar!!!!!!
Sorry. I should have said "depressing for DX/APS-C _DSLR_ users ... ."