Apple releases Aperture 1.1

12357

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 136
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,028member
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Gene Clean

    [B]For a person who was successful enough to form a company that was 'in the business for a long time' you certainly show some lack of understanding about pro photography, camera weight, the importance of stability, and last but not least, you show a disturbing lack of grammar skills. In a hurry?



    Thank you for commenting on the fact that I neglected to check through my post, as I usually do. That makes your argument stronger, no doubt.



    I certainly don't lack knowledge about pro photography. I'm willing to match my knowledge against yours any time.



    Camera weight is a matter of preference. While theoretically, a heavier camera will add to stability, and I prefer heaver cameras myself, there isn't much to be gained when using wide angle to moderate tele zoom lenses. Another few ounces one way or the other won't make a difference in low light conditions either. What matters more, is how you hold the camera, how you stand, whether you let your breath out when pressing the shutter, and whether you have mastered the gentle release.



    Smaller people with small hands often have more problems with large, heavy cameras than with small, light ones. A heavy camera will often lead to hand shake for someone who isn't strong.



    I'm certainly not recommending a Rebel, or for that matter, a D50, for a pro. As a main camera, they will choose higher end models. Even the D200, and the 30D aren't considered to be pro models. They are both thought of as prosumer models, or, at best, light duty studio cameras.



    But, pros will throw them into their camera bags just to be safe.



    Unfortunately, not all pros do the kind of work that generates the kind of fees that will enable them to spend upwards of $4,000 on a body. Those pro's may rely on D200's, and 30D's. They will throw Rebels and D70's in their bags instead.





    Quote:

    You missed the whole point. They can use rose gold and pay through the nose for it, but that doesn't change the fact that the camera feels like a snapshot camera that is cheaply built. 'Cheaply built' doesn't mean that the exterior was cheap to get for Canon, or that it's made of cardboard, but that it's a camera that was not built to last a long time.



    We've already had a post from someone who doesn't agree with your statement.



    But, just how long do you expect any of these low end camera's to last? Models that were criticized as being plastic and flimsy have lasted for three decades now. Polycarbonate is more rugged than the aluminum that most camera bodies were made from. When an aluminum body drops onto a hard surface, it often cracks. The parts inside are subject to the enormous shock. With poly bodies, the camera remains intact. The interior sustains less damage. The lighter weight of these bodies contributes to that as well, as less mass is involved.



    The very expensive pro bodies are made from heavy magnesium castings that sustain much less damage than aluminum ones that cheaper bodies use. The pro bodies are also designed with shock mounting for critical assemblies. They are also carefully sealed against dust, water, and some chemicals. None of the lower price cameras can claim that, though the D200, and the 30D do have some seals in delicate areas.



    Weight and feel are not good indicators of longevity.





    Quote:

    Not in a discussion about camera bodies.



    The discussion isn't just about camera bodies.





    Quote:

    Again, this doesn't matter when talking about the build quality of the CAMERA BODY. Lenses are interchangeable. The body is not. That's the point.



    As above.



    Quote:

    And Canon lenses are not a God's gift to humanity, au contraire, most of Canon lenses are lenses that are not of higher quality when compared to Nikon/Nikkor lenses; only the highest of high-end Canon lenses have a slight advantage when compared to high-end Nikon lenses.



    The rest are... well, lenses.



    We have to compare oranges to oranges. Or, lens lines to lens lines. Both Canon, and Nikon have several lines of lenses. The cheap lines that beginners buy. Those are bought by those buying the cheapest 35mm bodies. the mechanical and optical is pretty good, considering what people are being charged for them.



    Then there are the medium quality lenses. Those are bought mostly by amateurs. They are made better, and the optical quality is also better. They may be a half stop or so faster as well.



    Then there the pro lenses. These are often much more expensive. Again, they are more rugged, and have much better optical quality. They MAY be faster.



    At last we have the top of the line lenses. These use special glass, fluorite (yes, a few lenses still use it), and aspheric elements. They also have complex focusing and zooming mechanisms. They are often faster than any other lenses in their focal length. 300mm f 2.8, 400mm f 2.8, 600mm f 4, etc. These are much more expensive than even the regular pro lenses.



    so, compare line to line.



    The cheap lenses are a catch as catch can. None of them will win any prizes except when compared to each other. The comparisons between the better lenses are more meaningful, because if one is going to buy only the cheapest lenses, they any camera is good enough.
  • Reply 82 of 136
    Quote:

    Originally posted by icfireball

    Dude...



    Lightroom is like 0% there. Have you SEEN the beta. No class, no functionality, no usefullness.



    The only thing that can compete with Aperature is Photoshop itself. If Adobe gets CS3 with a really nice organization system *NOT LIGHTROOM* it would compete




    Yeah, icfireball, I agree completely. Lightroom is definitely not there. Maybe beta 3 will be a miracle?



    But then listening to the Lightroom team's podcasts, they're aiming pretty low. Not impressive at all.



    Nonetheless, history has shown that bundling a free but lame tool will often kill off a much better tool. IMHO, Apple has no choice but to come out with a PS (or PS Elements)-like tool, and soon.



    First there was Final Cut Pro. But that could never be successful by itself in the world of suites and bundles. So then there was DVD Studio Pro. Then Motion and Soundtrack and Live Type (not necessarily in that order). Now it's a classy suite.



    IMHO, Apple has to do the same thing for photo/design. Look how all the iLife apps (except the latest one, iWeb) have pro versions. That bodes well for an iWeb Pro (or whatever you want to call it).



    First Aperture, then a pro web design tool, then a pro drawing tool, then a pro photography tool, then a pro page layout tool. It's all coming...eventually.



    It just seems unlikely that Apple will let Aperture sit there all by itself. Adobe will try to kill it any way it can.
  • Reply 83 of 136
    Quote:

    Originally posted by melgross

    You really have to stop feeling inferior so often. It wasn't an insult. It was a compliment!



    Can I have some of the drugs you're on? That's an interesting reality.
  • Reply 84 of 136
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,028member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bikertwin

    Can I have some of the drugs you're on? That's an interesting reality.



    Because you seem to think that if someone disagrees with you they automatically have no respect for you. Not true.



    I was pointing out that since you would have done research before buying your camera, others could be expected to do the same. If you re-read the original post will less venom, you would see that.



  • Reply 85 of 136
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bikertwin

    Yeah, icfireball, I agree completely. Lightroom is definitely not there. Maybe beta 3 will be a miracle?







    It just seems unlikely that Apple will let Aperture sit there all by itself. Adobe will try to kill it any way it can.




    Aperture was too expansive. It's much better now. The 1,1 version is also much better than the previous one, excepting for the noise reduction in the de-rawtisator module, where I do not see any difference while checking or unchecking this option.



    Adobe will try to kill this software, but there is a very umportant point. When you have the habit of using a particular software and you love it, you are unwilling to change your habits.

    It take time for me, to know to use Aperture : I do not want to re-learn an another software now.
  • Reply 86 of 136
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Powerdoc

    When you have the habit of using a particular software and you love it, you are unwilling to change your habits.

    It take time for me, to know to use Aperture : I do not want to re-learn an another software now.




    Yeah, that's why Adobe has the free beta of Lightroom. Hook 'em while they're not thinking.
  • Reply 87 of 136
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bikertwin

    Yeah, that's why Adobe has the free beta of Lightroom. Hook 'em while they're not thinking.



    Yes, but the first version that I tested of lightroom was a failure : damn slow. It seems that Adobe released in hurry, lightroom because they where scared by aperture.

    The good thing, is that Apple was obliged to discount aperture
  • Reply 88 of 136
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,028member
    Hopefully, they will keep other on their toes.
  • Reply 89 of 136
    gee4orcegee4orce Posts: 165member
    Why is it that with cameras, light == cheap, yet with laptops, light == expensive ??



    I mostly use my 300D for landscape photography, and that usually means carrying the damned thing to the top of a mountain. Let me tell you, it's quite heavy enough, thank you. If the Nikon were heavier, that would definitely deter me from buying it.
  • Reply 90 of 136
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gee4orce

    Why is it that with cameras, light == cheap, yet with laptops, light == expensive ??



    I mostly use my 300D for landscape photography, and that usually means carrying the damned thing to the top of a mountain. Let me tell you, it's quite heavy enough, thank you. If the Nikon were heavier, that would definitely deter me from buying it.




    You are right, trekkers, hate weight
  • Reply 91 of 136
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,028member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gee4orce

    [B]Why is it that with cameras, light == cheap, yet with laptops, light == expensive ??



    Because, some people still regard the word "plastic" to mean "cheap". Which it doesn't.



    In relatively inexpensive cameras, polycarbonate has proven to be more durable that aluminum.
  • Reply 92 of 136
    kim kap solkim kap sol Posts: 2,987member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by melgross

    Because, some people still regard the word "plastic" to mean "cheap". Which it doesn't.



    In relatively inexpensive cameras, polycarbonate has proven to be more durable that aluminum.




    Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, should regard the word "plastics" cheap.



    i am making plastics right now.
  • Reply 93 of 136
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,835member
    I wonder how many current members get that reference.
  • Reply 94 of 136
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,028member
    Bikertwin.



    You might be interested to know that Sigma has just added Minolta and Pentax mounts to some of their lens offerings.
  • Reply 95 of 136
    Quote:

    Originally posted by melgross

    Bikertwin.



    You might be interested to know that Sigma has just added Minolta and Pentax mounts to some of their lens offerings.




    "just"?



    Sure, maybe they just added a couple, but they've been doing Pentax since forever.



    http://www.amazon.com/gp/search/ref=...sigma%20pentax



    Hey, did you hear Shake Universal Binary is coming out next month. Sorry, couldn't resist.
  • Reply 96 of 136
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Frank777

    I wonder how many current members get that reference.



    Count me out.



    Was that from The Graduate or something? Googling didn't return much.
  • Reply 97 of 136
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,028member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bikertwin

    "just"?



    Sure, maybe they just added a couple, but they've been doing Pentax since forever.



    http://www.amazon.com/gp/search/ref=...sigma%20pentax



    Hey, did you hear Shake Universal Binary is coming out next month. Sorry, couldn't resist.




    Not on the current digital series. That's new. At least it's here.



    Yes, of course. But did you notice that they had to put FCP 6 back in order to do it?
  • Reply 98 of 136
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JBL

    I agree! Those people who bought the original Macintosh. Sheeshh! 8MHz CPU and 128 KB of memory for $3000. If they had just waited 20 years they could have a machine 500 times as fast with 4000 times as much memory (not to mention a hard drive) for that kind of money.



  • Reply 99 of 136
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,835member
    It's an old joke that originated on these boards.



    Kim may have a better recollection than I do, but it has to do with the unveiling of the original iMac which was the first mac to go 'plastic'.



    After the changes in colour, the boards were always buzzing with questions about the next iMac colour scheme. Kim's insider claim that he was always right because he was "making plastics right now" became the board's definitive answer to this question.



    Did I get that right?
  • Reply 100 of 136
    kim kap solkim kap sol Posts: 2,987member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Frank777

    It's an old joke that originated on these boards.



    Kim may have a better recollection than I do, but it has to do with the unveiling of the original iMac which was the first mac to go 'plastic'.



    After the changes in colour, the boards were always buzzing with questions about the next iMac colour scheme. Kim's insider claim that he was always right because he was "making plastics right now" became the board's definitive answer to this question.



    Did I get that right?




    Oh yes...you're spot on.



    I too am curious...how many people here have been around in those days.



    I managed to snag the name after the AI boards went back online and were completely reset.
Sign In or Register to comment.