It looks like the end of the line now for non-Cloud Photoshop. They'll probably do the same in the next round for LR.
ddrueding
Fixture
Yup, for Acrobat too. Just went to their corporate model; enabling and assigning licenses to users by e-mail address. Just wish I didn't have to still buy them from a reseller; how hard is it to take a credit card?
mubs
Storage? I am Storage!
Gee, thanks, I think I'll stick with my PS CS3 and Foxit Phantom PDF.
Yes!!!
Nice selection of new Nikkor lenses.
- 24mm f/1.8G ED $725
- 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR $2260
- 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR $1370
Only Yen SRP prices listed. I used a converter to estimate US$ price.
I won't pick up the 24mm lens. If I sold my 16-35mm I'd probably get the 20mm and 28mm F/1.8G lens.
The new 24-70 is pricey but if it's better/sharper than the current one plus VR then it would be a strong consideration for purchase. Glad a new and hopefully better 24-70 is coming out nevertheless.
No gold ring or Nano coating on the 200-500mm. Cry. I guess I'd be $1000+ more if it was a "gold ring" lens. I still hope it's a decent to GOOD "consumer" lens. Plus it would be more versatile than than the $2000 300m F/4E
Nice selection of new Nikkor lenses.
- 24mm f/1.8G ED $725
- 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR $2260
- 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR $1370
Only Yen SRP prices listed. I used a converter to estimate US$ price.
I won't pick up the 24mm lens. If I sold my 16-35mm I'd probably get the 20mm and 28mm F/1.8G lens.
The new 24-70 is pricey but if it's better/sharper than the current one plus VR then it would be a strong consideration for purchase. Glad a new and hopefully better 24-70 is coming out nevertheless.
No gold ring or Nano coating on the 200-500mm. Cry. I guess I'd be $1000+ more if it was a "gold ring" lens. I still hope it's a decent to GOOD "consumer" lens. Plus it would be more versatile than than the $2000 300m F/4E
The 200-500 is disappointing. It needs to be as good at 500 as the Sigma Contemporaneous. I'm not expecting too much for the low price, especially in build quality.
Lenses like the 24/1.8 are really a good idea if the IQ is sufficient, though I have zero use for one.
It's also not a good sign that no new cameras were announced.
This.
Unfortunately THIS.
The more I think about it the more I'm reeeeeeeeeeeeeeealy disappointed that the 200-500mm isn't a "gold ring," "pro-level" lens. I could really see myself spending $2500 to $3000 for such a lens. Doubtful it will be as good as the 80-400mm. I guess Nikon doesn't want a good 200-500mm f/5.6 lens touching the sales of it's $7000 200-400 f/4G lens (which will probably/eventually get an "E" series update and maybe with a 1.4x TC built in like the Canon)
Lenses like the 24/1.8 are really a good idea if the IQ is sufficient, though I have zero use for one.
It's also not a good sign that no new cameras were announced.
No use for a 24mm lens? No landscapes or do you shoot wider or with a TSE lens?
Maybe new camera body release during the big photo shows later in the year or early next year??
I think this is just an interim lens only release as Nikon has been updating it's lenses (top down) to the E series, electronic aperture. 800mm f/5.6E, 600mm f/4E, 500mm f/4E, 400mm f/2.8E, 300mm f/4E, 24-70 f/2.8E and 24mm f/1.8E
I use the 24 TSE II. The f/1.4 or faster wide to normal primes are mainly for available light work, such as by PJs. The f/1.8s (other than a cheesy 50) are for the consumer middle market, such as D750 users.
No. It's $11k. No, you don't need a 200-400/4 IS 1.4x.
ddrueding
Fixture
The only one you need is a Canon L, and I think you already own a few.
Every Canon lens I have is an L.[SUB][/SUB]
ddrueding
Fixture
Specifically the 100-400/4L II
Yeah, I have a couple of those.
ddrueding
Fixture
See what happens when I have a few drinks? I did a very bad thing.
I guess the car can wait until November.
200-400/4 IS 1.4x?
The Canon 200-400 has a built-it 1.4x TC that can be moved into the optical path with a lever.
ddrueding
Fixture
Oh, I know about the lens. Is that the "very bad thing"?
See what happens when I have a few drinks? I did a very bad thing.
I guess the car can wait until November.
You sir, are a BAD ASS!!!
/golf clap
Got to love a guy that can, after a few drinks, drop $11,000 on a Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x Super Telephoto zoom lens.
That has to be your dearest lens, unless you have a 600m f/4 ($11.5k) and/or 800mm f/5.6 ($13k).
When are you getting that retirement home here in sunny Phoenix? I need a mentor that can school me in birding photography.
You sir, are a BAD ASS!!!
/golf clap
Got to love a guy that can, after a few drinks, drop $11,000 on a Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x Super Telephoto zoom lens.
That has to be your dearest lens, unless you have a 600m f/4 ($11.5k) and/or 800mm f/5.6 ($13k).
When are you getting that retirement home here in sunny Phoenix? I need a mentor that can school me in birding photography.
I'm trying to live as long as is feasible with a decent quality of life, but I have no illusions that it would be up to a normal retirement age. That is just as well since I have insufficient funds for retirement.
I should have a bunch more tests done next month. However, I'll only do the kind that are done consciously as I don't have a responsible person.
FWIW, I did not pay $11K.
ddrueding
Fixture
But you did only buy one (right?), that makes you the pinnacle of restraint.
But you did only buy one (right?), that makes you the pinnacle of restraint.
A 100-400 II would be a backup/second lens. I'm trying to decide what system to put together for this year's Africa. The challenges are more or less in the wider lenses and with the cameras.
400mm+1.4x would be the shortest long lens I've used since 2003, so the cameras have to make up for some of that. Last year I got killed on the 300-500 range though.
Are you planning to get a 70-200/4 or f/2.8? It is better than the 80-400 in that range, but the 80-400 is quite good. If you are not planning to buy two lenses (70-200 and 200-500), then get the 80-400. It is for sure very versatile and I do like using it. The 200-500 will be of more limited usage. If reach is an issue, the best bet will be to buy a DX body which gives the equivalent of 600mm on the 80-400 and IQ is still just fine.
ddrueding
Fixture
The 100-400 II on a crop body is pretty darn long. Adding a 1.4x or 2x makes it pretty crazy, but too slow.
100-400 II IQ with a 1.4X is acceptable, though not great, and only allows AF at the center point. Of course I can get about the same IQ from the 200-400 with a 2X on a 1DX compared to 100-400 + 1.4x on a 70D/7D II, but there is no net reach gain. For most people a DX body with an 80-400/100-400 is a better option than FX with a 200-400. As well, the high IQ of 100-400 II has made the 200-400 less necessary purely for IQ without TCs. The 200-400 does not lose much with the 1.4x TC (basically nothing with the 1DX, 5DsR remains to be seen) and it is easy to engage.
Stereodude
Not really a
Just don't kill any lions with all your shooting.
Will your 600mm f/4 focus that close? LOL. Sounds like a great trip. Post some pics if you are able to.
I think I'm going to pick up the Nikkor 200-500 f/5.6E if the tests out above the quality of the Tamron 150-600mm and close (or above(cross-fingers)) to the 2k Sigma 150-600mm lens.
Stereodude
Not really a
600mm? How about a 16-35.
Don't you have 3 or 4 versions of this lens?
And with the extra wide angle of view you won't need anybody to watch your back.
No. That one is of no interest. The Canon 11-24 is wide enough and optically excellent as you would imagine from a modern lens.
However, I have no use for an ultra-wide on that type of trip. I don't even bring a tripod.
ddrueding
Fixture
No tripod? Monopod? Do you handhold @ 600mm?
We are in vehicles, mostly modified Toyota Land Cruisers. I use a low-profile A-S replacement foot with crossed Wimberley support technique on bean bags such as the safarisack. People used clamps and ball heads in ancient times before IS and VR. Often the first timers will bring a monopod or tripod, but they give up on it after a few days.
I will hand hold up to 500+1.4x briefly as needed, but it is difficult in my condition. It was easier 10 years ago, but still only feasible for limited periods unless you are a weightlifter or the Cougtek.
The 500/4 IS II is 1.5lbs.lighter so it would be better. Shutter speeds need to be higher for handheld use. Of course the shorter lenses such as a 80-400 or 100-400 are often handheld when needed. Typically I lean the forearm on the beanbag for good support and can do that for extended periods.
ddrueding
Fixture
Wow, so you're spending most of the time at ISO800+ and as wide-open as the setup allows?