Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: julienlanoo on July 01, 2013, 01:36:07 pm
-
Don t know where to post this correctly,
But did any one already go into the PS CC sheme by Adobe?.. I know no one of my colleagues that have.. I wonder if the boycot is international?..
-
I know I am boycotting it as long as I can. At least until the disappearing cursor issue is resolved (I just bought a Nvidia GTX680 which appears to be solving it to a large extent).
-
I know I am boycotting it as long as I can.
me too!
I have absolutely NO issues with CS6 (nor with then few plugins I use) on my machine... and I hope future OS releases will also support CS6. Sure, at some point some OS won't support CS6 anymore ... but this will take some time so I don't have to think about it today. In any case I am totally pissed and will not buy any Adobe product at all in the future (unless they change their rent-model). Unfortunately there is no replacement for PS... but at least there are doable workarounds...
-
Mhm, actually, i know and can proove, every time they brought out a new version i bought it right away, this time i didnt ... :p hehe lets boycot !!
-
Mhm, actually, i know and can proove, every time they brought out a new version i bought it right away, this time i didnt ... :p hehe lets boycot !!
the only reason I updated to PS CS6 was file-saving in the background. With regard to the updated fancy tools I could very well work with CS4 (actually even with CS2).
-
But did any one already go into the PS CC sheme by Adobe?.. I know no one of my colleagues that have.. I wonder if the boycot is international?..
No intention to invest in CC here. At least not in its present form.
There are a few reports of people who have subscribed in the "Digital Image Processing" section.
I would have expected CC to be identical to CS6+a few new capabilities, but overall they seem to be running into a few more issues.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I will be using CS6 the coming years… ( although i have a bug sometimes; when painting in masks i have a delay)
and start looking for alternatives i can BUY
I am afraid that as soon i start using CC i cannot undo it ever again :-\
-
I have been on the subscription model for over a year now, and installed CC the day it was released. It has a couple of features I really like, especially the ability to use camera raw as a filter ...very useful and powerful. Several other features I like.
Personally I don't have a problem with CC, I use a couple of the other apps, and the $49 a month I pay just isn't enough money to worry about. OK, maybe it's a little more than just upgrading, but before it was still $25 or $30 per month to handle the upgrades, but all lumped into one payment. Now it's just a set amount each month. With the 20gb of storage I can drop my Dropbox pro account, another $10 a month. So all in it's only about $10 a month more expensive. For those that just use Photoshop, even cheaper
-
Hi Wayne
Just to bring this back to medium format, have you tried the camera-shake reduction feature? Seems to me it could prove more useful to medium format shooters than those working in smaller formats. In fact, it's the main reason I'm considering upgrading - sometimes you just have to shoot handheld ...
Peter
-
At this stage I would have thought all programs would be cloud based, except we're still waiting for municipal or country based high speed wireless.
I bought the CC suite and $49 a month isn't out of the question given that cost of buying up front is virtually equal.
In fact I thought at this point our computers would just be operating systems and everything came down the wire and we would buy programs like we subscribe to cable channels,
They may be good for some, not for others, but we know that the price of the program isn't the real price, because what seriously bothers me is that every and I mean every freelance assistant we work with has a computer full of programs that are hacked and cracked that they run for free.
Some even have a hack that allows for updates.
The legal buyers are the ones really footing the bill and I'm sure adobe, apple, etc. factors this into the price.
This isn't entirely generational, though the thought that anything that hits the internet is free is one of the worst mindsets for commerce that ever existed.
I don't understand how anyone that wants to make their living producing content can justify this and then expect to make a living off the content they produce.
I'm curious if they walked into a camera store and nobody was looking would they just load their pockets with cameras and lenses?
Maybe, maybe not, but regardless if you run a business your competing with people that run on the very edge of legality and seem quite comfortable with the thought.
The problem is the toothpaste is out of the tube and it seems obvious that it is an acceptable business model today.
OK semi rant over.
IMO
BC
-
first of all @bcooter, i but ALL my soft, not 1 illegal app on my computers, ( well not that i know of)
second the problem is that the Adobe cloud, hasn't the possibilities one can expect from such a cloud.
The best thing would have been that it's absolutely customisable and you pay ( as the philosophy of cloud is) for what you use, and what you want to use. But now you have choise of a package or Just photoshop.
But if i don't need illustrator, but only indesign and PS for instance, i don't see why i have to pay for illustrator, dreamweaver and the complete package..
Also you always have to get "Adobe Cloud Storage" with whatever you use, i don't need that i am settled, so why pay for it ? ...
If i buy my software package, i bought the first time at full price, then i only had to pay like 250 euros per upgrade, that's only a few months of cloud instead of 1.5 years ... So the point of the "same price" for a new package yes, for an upgrade ooh noo,
Further more, i wonder why that large price difference as there much much much cheaper apps with basicly the same basics.
Ok PS has more options but not that much more to justify it's price any more. Fine if they want to ask pro price, but then we want futures and service that justify it. Have you ever tried to get information from Adobe Help ? In comparison, 15 dollars Pixelmator, 24 h awnser 8 times more expensive Photoshop Adobe awnser within 3 months.. mhm It's like sleeping in F1 hotel but paying for Sofitel ..
-
James,
I have a story I like to tell, about the photo business. The Macy's of Paris, Galeries Lafayette, had a nice model called Laetitia Casta, with a beautiful body, as poster girl. She got fat, so she got a stunt double for the legs on the posters. Meself, I'd say that a new model with a demonstrably cute body would have been a smarter choice. Photoshop is an aging and fat cash cow, and Adobe has been remiss in getting a stunt double, and has no replacement in the wings; the market will speak, and something else will move into what is a defacto vacancy, aided by what is —wrongly— perceived as predatory pricing.
Microsoft thought activation would save its sales figures from piracy, what really happened was that Linux stole their server business, and then Linux/Android stole their phone business, and then Linux/Android clipped their low-end tablet sales to virtual zero while iPad and iPhone grabbed the top of the market. And yes, although I may be repeating myself, piracy didn't impact them so badly, the "free" competition came and ate their lunch.
Let me try and say it differently - Adobe is not a cloud company; moving "to the cloud" and away from their existing business model is a gamble because what is keeping PS alive these days is inertia as much as value for money. What they're doing, creating an opening for new entrants, looks to me very much like a controlled flight into terrain.
Edmund
At this stage I would have thought all programs would be cloud based, except we're still waiting for municipal or country based high speed wireless.
I bought the CC suite and $49 a month isn't out of the question given that cost of buying up front is virtually equal.
In fact I thought at this point our computers would just be operating systems and everything came down the wire and we would buy programs like we subscribe to cable channels,
They may be good for some, not for others, but we know that the price of the program isn't the real price, because what seriously bothers me is that every and I mean every freelance assistant we work with has a computer full of programs that are hacked and cracked that they run for free.
Some even have a hack that allows for updates.
The legal buyers are the ones really footing the bill and I'm sure adobe, apple, etc. factors this into the price.
This isn't entirely generational, though the thought that anything that hits the internet is free is one of the worst mindsets for commerce that ever existed.
I don't understand how anyone that wants to make their living producing content can justify this and then expect to make a living off the content they produce.
I'm curious if they walked into a camera store and nobody was looking would they just load their pockets with cameras and lenses?
Maybe, maybe not, but regardless if you run a business your competing with people that run on the very edge of legality and seem quite comfortable with the thought.
The problem is the toothpaste is out of the tube and it seems obvious that it is an acceptable business model today.
OK semi rant over.
IMO
BC
-
But did any one already go into the PS CC sheme by Adobe?
Yup. No problems with the software, but Adobe's cloud ain't so hot.
-
Don t know where to post this correctly,
But did any one already go into the PS CC sheme by Adobe?..
Hi,
Presumably some went for the introductory discount, but not me. I already paid for my Photoshop CS6 upgrade, so I'm not going to pay again for CC6. That will probably mean that I would have to pay the full subscription amount after the introductory period, which reduces the likelihood that I will at all.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Bart no stress, following talks on twitter, PS CC users are in minority, so they will certainly give some rebates in the near future again, as minority upgrades to CC now, so even less if its more expensive...
New users?.. Shure, who would that be, students just out of school?.. Or people starting out with not yet a lot of money, and not even shure they will hold on a year or 2 like every one was when they started?.. So a subscription to 50bucks a month for 2 years can be verry scary..
At least when you bought your app when one started you lnew you could sell it on if it didnt work out ...
-
Adobe mustnt be a cloud company, it isnt their core buisness,.. They should instead concentrate on making the fat lady sing, or mabe after 30 years its kids should be out of school...
Clouds thats ok we have enoigh of them already, you only need one...
Also acountancy wise are subscriptions not always that good in europe, as for tax reasons they are much more difficult to deduct. When you buy it, one can deduct over a year or 2 at 100 % , subscriptions are always difgicult to explain.. If it isnt communication or so..
-
Bart no stress, following talks on twitter, PS CC users are in minority, so they will certainly give some rebates in the near future again, as minority upgrades to CC now, so even less if its more expensive...
No stress on my part. Future rebates, maybe, maybe not? Adobe is rather aggressive in getting as many people as possible to sign up for a subscription as soon as possible. I've been offered a 2 year 'introductory' price level (BTW at the 30% elevated European price compared to the USA) if I decided within a week (last month). They are desperately trying to have this subscription model look like it's being accepted by the market, to convince their shareholders to allow them their bonus.
Unfortunate for them, after a few decades of experience and training in a commercial multinational corporation, I'm more than aware of the tactics to persuade (potential) customers. For those interested in a very easy to understand book about such topics, I can recommend this book (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Influence-Psychology-Persuasion-Robert-Cialdini/dp/006124189X/ref=pd_sim_b_3/279-7430510-0525053) by Dr. Robert Cialdini. It's currently the #19 book of Best Sellers in Business, Finance & Law, on Amazon (it's been 2257 days in the top 100, according to their site stats).
Cheers,
Bart
-
I'm a CC for over a year now and I must admit that for us it's much more interesting than buying the product, it's a spread out amount per month which is in my opinion better than shelving out a lot of money at once. (Over here the upgrades are ridiculously expensive compared to the us).
Price point one could argue about, but I think it's pretty nice. For example we are now switching from our normal bookkeeping program to online and we have to pay the same amount as I pay for the full suite from adobe...... And to be honest I think that's ridiculous, the bookkeeping software is much less complicated, I don't earn money with it and it gets less updates (maybe 3-4 a year). In other words, it could be worse ;)
The only thing that worries me is that if you stop paying you can't open old projects anymore with for example premiere, I think adobe should freeze the software if you stop paying to be honest, maybe only when you take a 2 year subscription, or for a certain fee, but now it's pay or get nothing.
-
Look, I'm not that wild about a subscription model, but since digital capture became the norm, all of us are in some form of subscription model whether we buy up front on in payments.
Even Edmund who shoots mostly for his own pleasure has been through camera after camera, system after system.
It's not an analog world, it's electronic and the electronic business model is to change and upgrade . . . sometimes for more money, sometimes for less.
Personally I find the time outlay to update software, change cameras, learn menus, a lot more bothersome and costly than the actual money for a software upgrade.
Who would have thought we would not only be photographer, director, processing lab, retoucher and pre press house, but every time a new digital film is introduced we would need to add a "part" to our processing machine and a new skill set.
What I find interesting, when I review past work I did with the Canon 1ds I don't see any real difference today, than I did then, other than our studios spends more time in front of the computer than ever.
Maybe it would have been smart to buy 4 1ds and 6 legacy computers, never change and keep shooting. Probably would have worked, but few of us are built that way.
IMO
BC
-
Hi,
I don't think so. Absolutely agree that software upgrades are cumbersome. Also I sort of find the subscription model good in the sense that it means a new focus. The software vendor makes money by keeping the customer satisfied. Less need to have some new and flashy that you can sell to existing customer base. We had something similar in the computer industry of yore, it was maintenance contracts and it was good for everyone.
On the other hand, I'd suggest that you may spend more time at the computer because your customers got more demanding, shooting 1Ds and using six year old computers/software may mean that you would loose business.
I'm not a commercial photographer, but I am quite happy with development. On the other hand we may have a situation where market is essentially saturated with good enough stuff. So a lot of innovation is going on so we upgrade, innovation that does little good?
Best regards
Erik
Look, I'm not that wild about a subscription model, but since digital capture became the norm, all of us are in some form of subscription model whether we buy up front on in payments.
Even Edmund who shoots mostly for his own pleasure has been through camera after camera, system after system.
It's not an analog world, it's electronic and the electronic business model is to change and upgrade . . . sometimes for more money, sometimes for less.
Personally I find the time outlay to update software, change cameras, learn menus, a lot more bothersome and costly than the actual money for a software upgrade.
Who would have thought we would not only be photographer, director, processing lab, retoucher and pre press house, but every time a new digital film is introduced we would need to add a "part" to our processing machine and a new skill set.
What I find interesting, when I review past work I did with the Canon 1ds I don't see any real difference today, than I did then, other than our studios spends more time in front of the computer than ever.
Maybe it would have been smart to buy 4 1ds and 6 legacy computers, never change and keep shooting. Probably would have worked, but few of us are built that way.
IMO
BC
-
James,
I cannot disagree with anything you said there.
It would seem the camera marketing guys are as good at getting us to "need" the latest camera as fashion guys are at getting women to "need" new $500 shoes every week or so :)
What is interesting is that I have stopped buying new computers, I just put more RAM in the old ones, and my two last camera buys have been 6 year old preowned models.
Edmund
Look, I'm not that wild about a subscription model, but since digital capture became the norm, all of us are in some form of subscription model whether we buy up front on in payments.
Even Edmund who shoots mostly for his own pleasure has been through camera after camera, system after system.
It's not an analog world, it's electronic and the electronic business model is to change and upgrade . . . sometimes for more money, sometimes for less.
Personally I find the time outlay to update software, change cameras, learn menus, a lot more bothersome and costly than the actual money for a software upgrade.
Who would have thought we would not only be photographer, director, processing lab, retoucher and pre press house, but every time a new digital film is introduced we would need to add a "part" to our processing machine and a new skill set.
What I find interesting, when I review past work I did with the Canon 1ds I don't see any real difference today, than I did then, other than our studios spends more time in front of the computer than ever.
Maybe it would have been smart to buy 4 1ds and 6 legacy computers, never change and keep shooting. Probably would have worked, but few of us are built that way.
IMO
BC
-
Yes and No James.
When I look at let's say 5 years ago and now there is a HUGE difference in workflow speed, options in Photoshop and filters I now use on a daily basis etc.
Could you not work with something from 5 years ago.... yeah of course.
But it's so handy what we have now :D
-
James,
I cannot disagree with anything you said there.
It would seem the camera marketing guys are as good at getting us to "need" the latest camera as fashion guys are at getting women to "need" new $500 shoes every week or so :)
Yes and Adobe used to be doing a good job at convincing PS users to upgrade on a regular basis as well.
Considering that they are promising wonderful new features with CC... Either:
- they are right and people would have kept upgrading at the same pace without CC,
- they are not and then CC makes even less sense than we thought.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Hi,
A better (optimal) way be to offer a perpetual license with a maintenance contract including free upgrades.
Best regards
Erik
Yes and Adobe used to be doing a good job at convincing PS users to upgrade on a regular basis as well.
Considering that they are promising wonderful new features with CC... Either:
- they are right and people would have kept upgrading at the same pace without CC,
- they are not and then CC makes even less sense than we thought.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
A better (optimal) way be to offer a perpetual license with a maintenance contract including free upgrades.
Absolutely, this would solve the #1 issue many of us have with the current CC framework, the fact that you will stop being able to edit your data if you stop paying.
From then on it is only a matter of pricing but Adobe would have a healthy pressure to keep prices reasonnable.
You should work in Adobe's board Erik! :)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I think there are already some good options other than photoshop for image processing and editing/compositing.
The CC monthly payments make sense for the more serious and or professional users who generally work on images every day or almost every day and really appreciate the improvements and refinements each new update of the software brings. For the casual user the cc is a disaster since those users generally do not update their software nearly as often and most likely they do not want or need to be worrying that their software will be deactivated and rendered useless if they miss a monthly payment and or the software can't connect to the internet and verify the license. (let alone the increased cost!).
I really do not like the business model of obligatory monthly payments on software. Most people have ENOUGH monthly payments as it is. It should be an option for those who want it but it should not be the only choice.
A lot of people will gravitate towards other software solutions and that will greatly reduce the adobe customer base.
-
Hi Wayne
Just to bring this back to medium format, have you tried the camera-shake reduction feature? Seems to me it could prove more useful to medium format shooters than those working in smaller formats. In fact, it's the main reason I'm considering upgrading - sometimes you just have to shoot handheld ...
Peter
I have tried the camera shake feature, and on some images the results are pretty amazing.
-
Yes and No James.
When I look at let's say 5 years ago and now there is a HUGE difference in workflow speed, options in Photoshop and filters I now use on a daily basis etc.
Could you not work with something from 5 years ago.... yeah of course.
But it's so handy what we have now :D
Frank,
I think you and I have different business models, but if we don't let's look at it this way.
The last few days we have been processing out thousands of images from a project, shot with two different camera makes, (plus two video cameras).
We're processing in light-room, because for some reason the latest C-1 is acting up on our machines and we don't have time to trouble shoot. (We will later).
Frank, yes the tools are more powerful, but interesting is that whatever I see on the back of the camera, isn't close to the computer in light-room and the galleries we produce are just a semi-close look of what the finals will really look like once we go into actual post production, work layers, color, tone etc. etc.
It's funny, when we started with the original 1ds we set the white balance, some tone effects and used the out of camera jpegs for galleries and it was fast, easy, pretty good and I thought at the time digital was magic.
I could process out a 4 days shoot of web galleries and post them online in a day. Today, we average about three days for each day shooting.
Now some of this is the economy and client expectations have changed, as we shoot approx. three times the set ups we did in the 1ds days, so I guess the post production time is a wash.
Still, during the time of the 1ds to our 1dx we've spent, $48,000 in canon bodies (upgrades).
Whew, even that number makes my head spin and honestly, the cameras are better but not over the moon better.
BTW: that doesn't included another 60k for digital backs about the same for computers and software, about the same again for drives and servers, same again for lenses, same again for lighting and grip and none of this includes the video we've added to our repertoire.
These numbers are close more than a nice house in the suburbs, actually almost anyplace in the world, except Hong Kong. (does Hong Kong have suburbs?)/
As far as the CC method, no I'm not crazy happy about it, seems there could be a better way to handle it and I think it's overpriced, though honestly I think most of the equipment we use today is overpriced, except for the Nikon D800 (sorry to mention that) the Canon 5d series and the new mirrorless cameras that have come to the market.
I still hold to the thought of whether we buy, rent, or subscribe, we've all been caught up in the subscription model when it comes to digital.
Buy a camera, then your going to need to upgrade your software to process it, Upgrade your software, you'll probably have to go to a new operating system, if your computer doesn't handle that, then it's on to a new computer and since most of these programs are touching nearly a gig, you'll need new internal drives and of course more external drives, probably with different drive interfaces and the wheel keeps turning.
Now, about every two days, I as well as every other photographer on the planet gets a survey someone wants you to fill out, usually a camera or software company.
My suggestion is keep the prices low, keep the upgrades serious not partial and think about all of the other changes a photographer has to make every time they upgrade.
Actually my suggestion is to ask me what I estimate a job today, compared to 2007 and set your camera prices to the same level most of us are working at today.
So my original thought of keeping a 1ds1 forever . . . I think it sounds pretty good.
IMO
BC
P.S. The cameras I'm enthralled with right now are the micro 4-3 system. In one large messenger bag I have three bodies, 7 lenses, one light, radio and on camera sound, headphones and accessories.
These cameras have calibration for the lcds, wi-fi, fast lenses.
We can shoot stabilized video that is very, very good, stills that are more than acceptable and the cost of all of this is under 5k.
Now in my view that's where the market is going, maybe not 4-3, (I hope it does but . . .) if not 4-3 then smaller lighter faster mirrorless cameras.
-
BC
P.S. The cameras I'm enthralled with right now are the micro 4-3 system. In one large messenger bag I have three bodies, 7 lenses, one light, radio and on camera sound, headphones and accessories.
These cameras have calibration for the lcds, wi-fi, fast lenses.
May I ask which micro 4-3 system gets you excited and in combination with which lenses? Sorry for going off topic.
-
J,
yes, Hong Kong has suburbs, they're called Canton :)
apart from that, is the HUGE number of frames which are getting processed really advancing the quality of the work?
It may amuse you, as I think no one in this forum will dispute my ability to use a Raw converter :) that I'm shooting mainly Jpeg these days, with Raw as a backup.
Edmund
Frank,
I think you and I have different business models, but if we don't let's look at it this way.
The last few days we have been processing out thousands of images from a project, shot with two different camera makes, (plus two video cameras).
We're processing in light-room, because for some reason the latest C-1 is acting up on our machines and we don't have time to trouble shoot. (We will later).
Frank, yes the tools are more powerful, but interesting is that whatever I see on the back of the camera, isn't close to the computer in light-room and the galleries we produce are just a semi-close look of what the finals will really look like once we go into actual post production, work layers, color, tone etc. etc.
It's funny, when we started with the original 1ds we set the white balance, some tone effects and used the out of camera jpegs for galleries and it was fast, easy, pretty good and I thought at the time digital was magic.
I could process out a 4 days shoot of web galleries and post them online in a day. Today, we average about three days for each day shooting.
Now some of this is the economy and client expectations have changed, as we shoot approx. three times the set ups we did in the 1ds days, so I guess the post production time is a wash.
Still, during the time of the 1ds to our 1dx we've spent, $48,000 in canon bodies (upgrades).
Whew, even that number makes my head spin and honestly, the cameras are better but not over the moon better.
BTW: that doesn't included another 60k for digital backs about the same for computers and software, about the same again for drives and servers, same again for lenses, same again for lighting and grip and none of this includes the video we've added to our repertoire.
These numbers are close more than a nice house in the suburbs, actually almost anyplace in the world, except Hong Kong. (does Hong Kong have suburbs?)/
As far as the CC method, no I'm not crazy happy about it, seems there could be a better way to handle it and I think it's overpriced, though honestly I think most of the equipment we use today is overpriced, except for the Nikon D800 (sorry to mention that) the Canon 5d series and the new mirrorless cameras that have come to the market.
I still hold to the thought of whether we buy, rent, or subscribe, we've all been caught up in the subscription model when it comes to digital.
Buy a camera, then your going to need to upgrade your software to process it, Upgrade your software, you'll probably have to go to a new operating system, if your computer doesn't handle that, then it's on to a new computer and since most of these programs are touching nearly a gig, you'll need new internal drives and of course more external drives, probably with different drive interfaces and the wheel keeps turning.
Now, about every two days, I as well as every other photographer on the planet gets a survey someone wants you to fill out, usually a camera or software company.
My suggestion is keep the prices low, keep the upgrades serious not partial and think about all of the other changes a photographer has to make every time they upgrade.
Actually my suggestion is to ask me what I estimate a job today, compared to 2007 and set your camera prices to the same level most of us are working at today.
So my original thought of keeping a 1ds1 forever . . . I think it sounds pretty good.
IMO
BC
P.S. The cameras I'm enthralled with right now are the micro 4-3 system. In one large messenger bag I have three bodies, 7 lenses, one light, radio and on camera sound, headphones and accessories.
These cameras have calibration for the lcds, wi-fi, fast lenses.
We can shoot stabilized video that is very, very good, stills that are more than acceptable and the cost of all of this is under 5k.
Now in my view that's where the market is going, maybe not 4-3, (I hope it does but . . .) if not 4-3 then smaller lighter faster mirrorless cameras.
-
Don't get me wrong james, I'm in sync with what you say.
I still shoot film and find myself almost changing nothing to the scans, also with digital I try to get 99% of the shot in camera, I even experiment with m42 lenses to get also as much of the look I want in camera instead of having to tinker in PS, wasted time in my opinion, fact is however that what took me 20 minutes 5 years ago, now can be done in a few clicks, that's more what I meant. Especially plugins have gotten enormously good.
The Fujifilm cameras stunned me personally and are always with me, the sensor design is genius, no moire and razor sharp, and indeed small ;)
Also the Sony a99 has surprised me, to a point I switched from canon to Sony, I'm looking forward to a camera without mirror and curtain to really break open some new ways to shoot, I think Sony will be leading the market with this in the next 5-10 years.
It are exciting times, but the fact is, a good shot is done with what's behind our eyes and not what's in front.
-
It are exciting times, but the fact is, a good shot is done with what's behind our eyes and not what's in front.
I agree somewhat exciting times and I also like the A99. I haven't fully tested one yet, but after the Panasonic gh3 and olympus omd, I'm finding the non Nikon, Canon cameras to be outstanding and Sony can make very fine equipment.
Since we already have Zeiss Sony mount lenses for our Sony video cam we convert, it wouldn't be a great leap to go Sony.
If I do I probably will sell of the Nikon lenses and Canon bodies, (keep the Canon lenses for our Scarlet.
I still would like to see smaller 35mm cameras, somewhat like the OMD, just about 10% larger which is almost 35mm film camera dimensions.
BTW: I got C-1 running again and after comparing my processing from lightroom 4 to C-1, I reprocessed most of the imagery in C-1. It is just that much better for the Canon files.
Just wish it had a few of lightrooms functions.
IMO
BC
-
Did you even try DxO James, I find that they have some of the finest engines for Canon/Nikon and Sony.
Sony is indeed exciting, for me one of the driving reasons was the WYSIWYG EVF (working EVF) and the fact IS in the body.
I love to work with old lenses for their special look and colors (minolta colors :)) and with focus peaking in the viewfinder this works like a charm.
Combined I travel a lot lighter with the A99 than with the Canon, and most of the times it just lifts the weight to a point where I don't have a problem with airport security :D