Jump to content

Richard Coombs

Verified
  • Content Count

    298
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Richard Coombs

  1. I'll give you 10/10 for your reply bobsy. Mine wouldn't have been quite so polite! I've been had by freeloaders like that before.
  2. Anyone any experience? I have just downloaded the trial version to see what Fuji X Pro 1 files look like in it and there would appear to be a big improvement over Capture 1 and LR 4 and 5. I loaded a couple of the worst blotchy, watercolour painted looking files I had into it where both background leaves and foreground grass looked absolutely awful, and to my surprise saw a marked improvement! Still not perfect, but a damn site better than I have seen before. I think its the first time I have ever seen my XP1 files rendered anything like "well"! Haven't tried any adjustments in i
  3. I used to take them out, but don't bother now. Like others I make sure the appropriate boxes are ticked and leave it to the end user.
  4. Out of 100, I would guess about 10 to 20 would end up binned through bad exposure, blurred etc. It can on occasions be a lot higher wastage as I do tend to rush things sometimes. I keep all remaining pictures and typically upload between 10 and 25 to Alamy. Lot of factors involved, so difficult to answer, but I reckon the above is pretty typical for me
  5. Nice one Alex! Always good to hear of a success. Gives the rest of us some hope to cling to
  6. Likewise Ed, I'm not going to take up Adobes generous offer either. As far as I'm concerned, they can shove it!!!
  7. Can't see any of the NEX's on the "unsuitable" list. I remember a thread on the old forum about the Fuji X10. Some people, including myself thought that files from the camera should be acceptable. Alamy resolutely refused to accept it, however, a couple of members piped up and said that they had submitted pictures from the X10 and that they had been accepted. Work that out!
  8. Or, as I like to say "you might as well ask my Mums cat Lucky"
  9. What a peculiar answer. Well, they might as well put it on the recommended list, there's enough of us using it. I've got loads of NEX 6 shots on Alamy, but I don't use the 16-50.
  10. Yeah, I've been around the 48 hour mark for a long time except for bank holidays etc. but just lately 12 to 24 hours seems to be the norm.
  11. I don't bother calibrating my iMac monitor these days and I have the auto brightness adjustment turned off. I have the brightness slider about half way and I simply control ambient by closing the blinds and pulling the curtains aswell if it is a particularly bright day. Rich.
  12. Ed. I'd be interested to know why you have a problem with the Sigma 19 and 30. I've been using them for some time, and they seem pretty good to me, particularly the 30. Hey, I've decided I'm coming over to New York for a short stay to shoot some pictures, something I've wanted to do for a long time. I'll bring my lenses with me and you can try them. Oh, and clear down that corner in your apartment for me!
  13. This is an interesting thread, I'd love to join in but I just don't have time to type it all out!
  14. Ed, do you have Birra Morretti over there. Swig a bottle of that, breathe on the screen or lens and Bobs your Uncle, works every time. Swear by it!
  15. Martyn. The biggest problem(s) with the XP1, as far as I am concerned, is the poor RAW conversion support and the very slow and, more importantly, inconsistent focus. The NEX has very slow focus, but it is at least consistent in its results. I do actually use the XP1 quite a lot, but I have to pick and choose my subjects. I suggest you Google "X Pro 1 watercolour effect" to see what I am talking about on the RAW issue. There are a number of (extreme) examples of this particular anomaly. An anomaly that is bloody annoying to say the least! It is slightly better since adobe improved(?) t
  16. Definitely "a can of worms" Martyn! At the time of writing, I would have to say NEX6 with Sigma and or Zeiss lenses. I have the X Pro 1, 35 and 60 lenses. There are a large number of people who are very happy with the Fuji X Trans sensor, I however, am not one of them. Rich.
  17. Sorry, I can't answer your question as I don't import direct into LR and I always eject the card from the desk top. However, I can highly recommend Kelby's book on LR4, I refer to it constantly. I'm sure someone around here will be able to answer your question. All the best.
  18. Yeah, good point John. Its not something that I have run into trouble with so far personally. But I do sit and scratch my head sometimes wondering whether to upload or not. Might be good to have a bit of guidance. Although, how we read it and how QC read it might be two very different things!
  19. Yes John, I agree, it is a shame. Sigma undoubtedly have the technology to produce such lenses. But I guess they are probably feeling their way into the mirrorless market rather than commit to big R and D budgets this early in the game. They seem to be more concerned with doing what they do best, and that is to produce good value, sharp, basic lenses. It would be nice to have PDAF and IS, but I can manage without them. What I couldn't manage without is a corner to corner sharp lens though! So, hey ho, maybe later versions will have those luxuries. I'm sure when the likes of Fuji and So
  20. I forgot to say when I posted about the Sigma 60 the other day. I emailed Sigma to ask whether they had any plans to make the new lenses compatible with the NEX PDAF system through firmware updates. Apparently they do not!
  21. I was always cleaning the sensors on my old 5D and 1D Mk 2. I've been using mirrorless for some time now (over a year), mostly Fuji X Pro 1 and NEX and I have yet to see a dust spot! Long may it continue!
  22. The majority of my shots are vertical, although I do both where appropriate. In terms of sales over the years, I would say there has been a pretty equal split.
  23. John, I could be wrong, but I think the first picture D8C2DB is actually a Mark 3 not a 2/4. I was once married into a family that collected and raced Astons, I was force fed them for about 13 years! One of their race cars was a 3 and that one looks very much like it. If I remember rightly the 2/4 has a "lower profile" grill than the 3. Apologies if I am wrong, it was sometime ago that I escaped that world. Rich.
  24. Ed. Aside from the new 60 I also have the old Sigma 19 and 30. The 30 is excellent and the 19 is similarly pretty good in my estimation, certainly streets ahead of the Sony 16. It would be interesting to do a comparison between the new, and old 19 and 30 to see if there is any real difference. Assuming that the new Sigmas meet with approval from NEX users I would have thought that Sigma would gradually increase their range, at least, I would like to think so. I've been a Sigma fan for many years. Like you, I have the CZ 24 and that hasn't been off my 6 since I bought it. Zeiss have their t
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.