alex_jaimes1

Thanks. I don't have one- I want one for video, so motorized. I'm currently looking at the DJI Ronin-SC. The 90/2.8 macro is not on their list of supported lenses, and I've only found 1 review that says they got it to work (although not perfectly). The SC seems like a good option, but I'm not sure. The Weebill S might be another option, but it also doesn't officially support my 90 mm lens...

Hi! I have a 90 mm 2.8 lens- not clear if it will work- it's not on the supported list, but I did find an article that claims it works "ok" with that lens. Either way, any other gimbal recommendations? Thanks!

I think I found a good solution:

I'm a little confused by the CC options (20GB vs 1TB or more). I have about 20TB worth of photos (RAW), and while I like the idea of being able to work on multiple devices, it wouldn't make sense for me to pay for 20TB of Adobe on-line storage every month. I can do 20GB or 1TB, but it's not clear to me how that would work IF I have a full catalog that exceeds those limits by a lot. IF I use the 1TB plan, for instance, does the storage fill up with the first images that take up 1TB and then everything else will only be local, in which case the only advantage of 1TB over 20GB is that I'll see a larger chunk of my collection on-line? in other words, ideally, the ones that go on-line would be the 1TB or 20GB worth of *newer* images, so if I add more, it's new ones that go on-line. But does it work that way/can it be set up that way? It seems like if not, with CC it *only* makes sense to pay for extra storage only IF the storage is sufficient for the entire catalog one wants to work with? (in my case 20TB or so..) Thanks!

I just switched from Nikon to Sony so I have many thousands of Nikon raw images. I shoot a lot and only edit a very small portion of my images. From what I've read C1 seems to be "better" for editing raw files (or at least, the initial settings ). Since I have so many Nikon images, I'd have to buy the pro all camera version ($299 license, or $180/year), to keep everything in the same catalog. Since I have a Sony, I get C1 express for free. Would it make sense to have the LR+PS subscription, for cataloguing purposes, and use C1 express for editing? I'm not sure how significant if the differences between C1 pro and C1 express would justify buying that. C1 is more expensive, no matter how you look at it, and given that I edit very little, not sure it makes sense to go with C1. I do care a lot about the quality of the images, but I don't need the tethering/annotation functions in C1.

I ended up getting the Sony 24 mm 1.4G. It's a little bigger than I would like, but that's the "price" to pay...

So I'll answer my own question. I went to B&H and tried a couple of cameras and they behaved the same way. So it's normal..

Thanks- you are right- if I switch it on and immediately touch the shutter, I don't see the vivid- it jumps straight to the "washed out" (which corresponds to PP10). So it seems like your camera behaves the same way and this is normal?

Hi! I just got one, I set picture profile to PP10, and I noticed that when I first switch the camera on and look through the viewfinder (OR the display), the image appears quite vivid, for about half a second, and then it looks washed out. I did a factory reset and indeed, noticed that this happens when picture profiles are on (it's less noticeable with some profiles). It's kind of annoying, but is it normal or is it a defect on my particular camera and I need to return it? Even with profiles off, it seems to "flicker" very quickly when first switched on.. thanks! alex

I decided to wait and was ready to buy the batis, but now there's the new sony 24 mm f1.4. looks very attractive (over the batis). any early opinions?

Thanks! my interest is in street photography, but this is helpful.

I went to the store and I'm leaning towards the Batis. Was going to get the A7Riii and saw the Nikon announcement of a new mirrorless camera being released on 8/23, so now it seems like i should wait. Even the batis seems a little big for the A7riii..

Thanks Ed. I'm not really considering an adapted lens- it's more of a choice between those 3 (batis, sigma, sony)..

Thanks for the responses. I've been shooting a 24 mm on a Nikon D800s for years- and yes, the 28 seems really different in terms of FOV. I shoot mostly street photography, and do a lot of people shots with the 24. I don't particularly shoot in low light, but find the lower f-stop useful when I do. I had not considered the Zeiss Batis 25/2- I haven't bought the Sony 7rIII, but that's the plan. all of my lenses are nikon, but my 24 mm is old, manual, and really need to replace it. so now i'm confused between those 3 (the ones i posted and the Zeiss Batis 25/2)- would it be correct to rank those 3 lenses quality-wise (best first): zeiss, sigma, sony ?

Hi! I'm debating between those two lenses. The Sigma is a lot more expensive and heavy, but I'm used to shooting 24 mm, but is it such a good lens that it'd be worth paying that much more and carrying the extra weight (besides the obvious 2 vs 1.4)? [sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens for Sony E] vs [Sony FE 28mm f/2 Lens] I can't find any comparisons online.. Thanks! alex

Hi! I'm looking for a tilt-shift app for an iphone 6, where you can see the effect as you take the picture (not interested in adding it after picture is taken). On that's easy to use. There are so many, but most don't seem to do that? thanks!

So far I've been storing my RAW files on external HDDs (3 copies, one off-site). I now have about 10 TB of photos+videos and I'm thinking of cloud as a backup for RAW files. Option 1: backup "only" in case something happens to the HDDs. so access would be very infrequent, if ever (Amazon Glacier). Option 2: backup that I could also use to access images (e.g., Amazon Cloud drive) Option 2 seems pretty expensive (compared to keeping HDDs myself and not having any cloud backup)- with amazon could drive, it would be $600/year (same with Backblaze B2). Of course, I could instead store low-res images on the cloud and fit everything in a free service- and maybe option 1 + that would be cost effective. What would you recommend? is there a cheaper option than Amazon Glacier?

<p>Thanks everyone. Indeed, a 27" iMac + the NEC together give a *lot* of screen real estate. And take up a lot of space (that I don't particularly have!).<br> So I've looked at all configurations: 21.5" iMac + NEC, 27" iMac + NEC, MPB + NEC. And what I'm finding is that while the MBP+NEC combination seems most convenient, in the end, it is several hundred $ more expensive and I loose computational power, but gain mobility. So getting an iMac+NEC would give me the "best" home system for the lower price. And I agree that the Mac Pro is overkill and even more expensive. I'm leaning towards the 27" iMac + NEC, and if I find that I really need mobility, then buying either an older MB Air/MBP or the lower end MPB assuming I won't do any intensive work on it. With this setup, I run the risk of not using the NEC that much (only for color accurate tasks, once in a while), but it seems like that would be worth it.. </p>

<p>Thanks everyone. I know that a MBP will work- on the other hand, it ends up costing pretty much the same as the 27" 5K Retina iMac and I'll get less power, so unless I absolutely need mobility, the iMac seems like a better deal. But for those of you who use an iMac + an additional monitor, how do you use them? I mean, do you use the external monitor only for color correction when you are ready to print? i spend a lot of my time going over many photos, selecting, organizing, so I'm debating if a 2 screen setup is overkill.</p>

<p>I've done things "backwards"- bought a PA272W-BK-SV LED Backlit Wide Gamut LCD Desktop Monitor with Spectraview ($1,099 at B&H) first, and now I'm debating whether to buy a MacBook pro OR an iMac with Retina display or even a mac mini.<br> I've read that most people seem to go with the MBP and a monitor like the one I got? But I'm also wondering if some of you use both (iMac with an additional display like the one above), and how? The reason I got the NEC is what I read about color accuracy. I don't print often, but I figured it was a good investment that would last a few years. I'm assuming that having the iMac with the NEC would be really useful during editing, in selecting shots, for example (although I assume colors wont' quite look the same in both), when there are near duplicates. So in terms of computational power and extra screen real estate, the NEC with the iMac would seem like an ideal combination, but I loose mobility? (i also do some "light" video editing).<br> Thanks!<br> Alex</p> <p> <br> <br> <br> </p>