Aperture vs Lightroom

Spoke to the local photogeek at the expensive camera shop and was told that the D80/90 is supposed to have better colour depth reproduction compared to the 350/400D. But then again he didn't know about camera raw.

@bwana, do you get the full fps (3?) when shooting high speed in camera raw or only in jpeg/tiff?
I don't know - I'm only using raw at the moment and haven't had much call to use the continuous shooting mode. I do know that the number of continuously taken shots allowed in raw format is lower than jpg but the book doesnt give any info on the frame rate apart from saying up to 3.
 
Apparently the speed of the compact flash card can also have an impact on the ability to shoot at full speed in continuous mode. Do you need the "ultra" speed cards or is a 12mb/s card ok?
 
Apparently the speed of the compact flash card can also have an impact on the ability to shoot at full speed in continuous mode. Do you need the "ultra" speed cards or is a 12mb/s card ok?
I have a 50x and a 80x card. I haven't tried it on a slower card as the only one I have would be filled after a couple pics :o
 
Apparently the speed of the compact flash card can also have an impact on the ability to shoot at full speed in continuous mode. Do you need the "ultra" speed cards or is a 12mb/s card ok?

Yes, it does. I have a 80X 1Gb, and ??x 6Gb Microdrive. Can't really tell the difference when shooting, but the drive is busy for longer afterwards :D
 
bwana, thought of getting the Camera connector for your 400D -> iPod?
Got it while I was waiting to find a reasonably priced 2nd cf card. :D

Its a bit slow - though not nearly as bad as I thought it would be - and it wont display the raw files but it stores them well and certainly gets the job done.
 
I always though that the ipod picture compression was impressive.
When you use the camera connector you get to choose whether it compresses the images on transfer?
 
Got it while I was waiting to find a reasonably priced 2nd cf card. :D

Its a bit slow - though not nearly as bad as I thought it would be - and it wont display the raw files but it stores them well and certainly gets the job done.

Cool. I must say, I am also very impressed. Only problem is that you can't run it (iPod) off AC while the adapter is on (the battery runs out before I can dump the 6Gb onto it :( )
 
I always though that the ipod picture compression was impressive.
When you use the camera connector you get to choose whether it compresses the images on transfer?
No - I dont think so but then again I just plugged it in, a new menu popped up and off I went. It's a nice thing to have if you dont feel like lugging a lappy around and are planning on taking a lot of photos.

It's also advisable to bring your charger too. :o
 
It's also advisable to bring your charger too. :o

Yeah, but in my case I still interrupt the import process, and I am not sure if it will only import the remaining photos, or start from scratch
 
Wouldn't it be cool if some accessories piggybacked the dock connector. A bit like the expansion slots on the Sinclair ZX Spectrum
 
Back on topic and a few months later... I just loaded lightroom and played around with it, must say I tend to prefer it to aperture. It has more functions and some filters and I even found the red eye trick which it seems aperture is lacking in.

Not having Photoshop on the Macbook, Lightroom gives me a bit more control over PP than does Aperture.

Oh yes, the raw imaging seems to work fine in Lightroom now.

I also ordered the trial Adobe DVD ($10) that has Photoshop CS3 extreme on as a ± 700 mb download does not appeal to me.The DVD has some other Adobe products on too.
 
Back on topic and a few months later... I just loaded lightroom and played around with it, must say I tend to prefer it to aperture. It has more functions and some filters and I even found the red eye trick which it seems aperture is lacking in.
Aperture has red-eye reduction so perhaps you might have also missed the other features you think Aperture is lacking?

But hey - if it works for you then that's what counts - streamlining your workflow is what's important. :)

EDIT - Maybe I'll give Lightroom another shot - they might have improved it quite a bit since I tested the beta.
 
Last edited:
Aperture has red-eye reduction so perhaps you might have also missed the other features you think Aperture is lacking?

But hey - if it works for you then that's what counts - streamlining your workflow is what's important. :)

EDIT - Maybe I'll give Lightroom another shot - they might have improved it quite a bit since I tested the beta.

Yup, it is a question of workflow - if I can't find it quickly, its lacking..;) but, it seems as if Lightroom is using quite a few resources as opposed to Aperture - fan runs continuously (or shall I say it runs louder than when using Aperture).. Maybe I should RTFM with Aperture.. :o
 
Yup, it is a question of workflow - if I can't find it quickly, its lacking..;) but, it seems as if Lightroom is using quite a few resources as opposed to Aperture - fan runs continuously (or shall I say it runs louder than when using Aperture).. Maybe I should RTFM with Aperture.. :o
Not that it makes a difference but redeye reduction is the icon that actually looks like a red eye or you can tap the 'e' key. :)
 
Not that it makes a difference but redeye reduction is the icon that actually looks like a red eye or you can tap the 'e' key. :)

Yup, thanks, found it... I was looking in the menus for it and did not notice the eye icon :o

Do yourself a favour and try Lightroom, would like to hear your comments on it.
 
Yup, thanks, found it... I was looking in the menus for it and did not notice the eye icon :o

Do yourself a favour and try Lightroom, would like to hear your comments on it.
I have tried lightroom ;)

Not sure if I'm going to be revisiting it any time soon - I've got all my photos in aperture and dont have the space to duplicate the 50gb library for Lightroom. :(
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X