nhmorgan wrote:
If it’s the same as the odds that small companies like Helicon or Zerene can make better focus stacking software than adobe then it’s 100%.
If adobe wanted to prioritize better focus stacking they certainly could, but there have been no improvements to it in a long time and it is definitely one of the weaker options for stacking images. I think your framing misses that point.
Nikon doesn’t seem to put much energy into their software either, because as I mentioned above, for whatever reason, their pixel shift processing takes forever, even on a high end computer. Maybe it’s just no Mac optimized and that’s the issue, but either way, it’s the sole reason I don’t like to use my Nikon when I need to use pixel shift in studio (which is a lot). ...Show more →
I guess you missed the free part.
And until proven otherwise I am not convinced that Adobe could. They haven’t been able to catch up the much smaller DxO in NR after years of trying, are still so far behind PTgui in stitching that it isn’t even funny,… example abounds where it takes the dedication of a small group of dedicated software experts whose income depends on it (typically as business owners) to create top performing software in niche areas.
I have in depth personal experience that makes me estimate the ratio at around 5~10 to 1 in terms of how many more software engineers a large team needs vs a start up one staffed with passionate experts to achieve similar results.
And this is where the free part plays a decisive role. Decision makers are quick to kill internal projects that fail to achieve convincing results when they realize the cost structure vs the null income being generated. And engineers are quick to understand that such projects aren’t the best way to get promoted.
Anyways the facts very clearly back up my views. But please keep hoping. In the mean time I’ll keep using my Helicon focus license.
RoamingScott wrote:
This thread really took the collective IQ out of the fridge and left it on the counter overnight 🤣
Collective name calling now? I haven’t seen any (convincing) argument from you regarding the reason why Nikon would be a likely culprit for Tamron’s issues besides your feelings that they are. Are your feelings a demonstration of high IQ?
I'm not sure why you quoted me on this, my post didn't take a position on who was "at fault" (I don't think it matters). I just responded to your request for a person who could confirm that their issues weren't caused by leaving a third-party lens attached during the upgrade process.
Impressive to me how readily folks here jump to the defense of their beloved corporate entity. Clearly someone dropped the ball here, either Tamron or Nikon. Issues like this, with officially licensed third party products, should never be visible to customers. Companies make mistakes, just like people, and it's not really worth the drama.
itai195 wrote:
Impressive to me how readily folks here jump to the defense of their beloved corporate entity. Clearly someone dropped the ball here, either Tamron or Nikon. Issues like this, with officially licensed third party products, should never be visible to customers. Companies make mistakes, just like people, and it's not really worth the drama.
Agreed, someone dropped the ball. All evidences point to Tamron. The issue doesn’t occur for the 35-150 with the latest Tamron firmware released prior to the Z8 firmware 3.0, they admitted the issue with other lenses. It seems pretty clear that their implementation of the protocole had issues that were not consistently adressed.
