ACDSee Photo Studio Ultimate | The Photographer’s Secret Weapon
When the next version of the software is released you can choose to upgrade to the new version at special upgrade pricing, or continue using your current version. Thank you for your honest feedback. You continue to be an integral part of shaping not only Gemstone, but all ACDSee products and we are forever grateful for that. Cheers to you! Are you an ACDSee beginner or expert? Either way, check out our Video Tutorial Resource Center for tips, tricks and tutorials!
Stay informed. We have something for everyone who is interested in digital photography and photo editing. Want to learn more about ACDSee in a live, interactive setting? Sign up for the next workshop! Login to your acdID account to view exclusive upgrade pricing. To activate your software, to validate your subscriptions, or to access online services, you will need a valid email address and an internet connection.
Let alone a complete system change. At the highest ISOs even a tiny increase in read noise would be amplified many, many times. If this is the case, then the slightly reduced high ISO performance is the price you pay for the camera’s increased speed.
Overall we’d say the X-T3’s image quality is at least as good as the X-T2’s: just don’t expect a low-light improvement just because it’s a BSI sensor. So what they actually said is that the low-light performance improvements from BSI got cancelled out by Fuji’s increase in sensor read speed. You have done the same. I stated the benefits are negligible in actual use. DPR states that the gains do not warrant an upgrade between models as the differences are not that significant in actual use.
In fact it states the benefits do not even come close to warrant an upgrade. My point being if already invested in Canon, the XT4 does not offer value.
Even if you look into long term investment as a system. The R7 offers these types of users an upgrade path to FF and the associated benefits of an interchangeable camera system that includes bodies. We can also look at other trade offs Vs the Fuji, whislt not BSI is 32mp and has what many would argue the superior focusing system of the R3. Here is a good example where BSI technology which both allows a sensor to have around a fifty percent better light fill factor and superior data throughput compared to FSI sensors made a huge difference – the Sony A7 III versus the older “II”.
The most significant difference was the switch to a BSI sensor. This made the newer model into a low light and dynamic range champion, compared with the older FSI version that had merely average performance in those areas. I hope we are done with this topic.
If you want to keep believing that “benefits are negligible” with BSI, then so be it. And nothing you have said changes the truth of my O. It’s more or less a perfect upgrade to a 7D2. Of course a better evf, less rolling shutter when using electronic shutter, better low light and an R5 body would have been VERY nice – but then of course you would have been repeatedly going on about the price rather than the evf and immaterial BSI I was really happy with my 7D mkii and EF long lenses.
When that time does come I will have had the maximum value out of existing gear and no doubt a contender will be a R7 mk xx. Therein lies the dilemma with camera models replaced frequently every 24 months. All my cameras replaced with higher prices to match. Given the size and fire-power of the Fuji AF lens artillery the stakes are high with Canon firing their R7 light-machine gun.
No sign of Fuji XF retreating yet? The 7DII was introduced in as the replacement for the 7D, which was introduced in That’s a five year gap. The R7 comes eight years after the 7DII. The R was introduced four years ago. No replacement on the horizon. The R5 and R6 were introduced two years ago, and there’s certainly no hint of them being replaced anytime soon.
The frequent replacement cycle only ever applied to lower priced models in the Canon lineup anyway. The 1 series and 5 series DSLRs were replaced about every four years. Clearly, this is a trial balloon to see if mirrorless APS-C is profitable and large enough as a sector. So all you early adopters, please go out and buy this camera! As long as this R7 makes Sony update the a, I’m happy to see it released.
It does have a few external physical controls the a needs. It also look like the video features and specs are much better. The R7 is a bit large, heavy, and bulky for my liking, but I’m sure some people like larger cameras in the shape of DSLR’s.
Does Canon pool model numbers out of a hat? R1 is the highest end but R5 is higher than R3, but R7 is higher than R They make great cameras but how about some easier way to differentiate between cameras at a glance? Just asking…. R3 is higher than R5, canon spec is not based on pixel count 5D always higher pixel than 1D, always been but features canon and nikon is easy, canon lower number means higher grade nikon higher number is higher grade.
I agree. I am tired of companies giving misleading naming schemes. Canon’s not alone. Sony, Nikon, Apple, MS, and so on do the same thing. Just like their camera menu system, their naming system is one of the easiest and straightforward to understand imo.
It’s been this way for decades. Do DPR users pull user names out of a hat? What does ‘Eclectant’ signify? Are you trying to tell us that your taste in ants is eclectic? We common people go for ordinary black or red ants. Just asking Canon’s numbering for everything but M has been consistent since the film days:1is flagship, 3 is almost so, 5 is semi-pro.
With digital, they’ve added 7 for the high end crop sensor and 6 for entry-level full frame. I loved my SL3 by sold it for that reason alone.
Battery grip and interchangeable eye cups seem to be more important than pro-oriented AF and 30fps. Funny summary! AF has to keep up, too. And most cameras that don’t have DRAM stacked sensors can’t maintain their max fps with an equal, or even close to equal hit rate.
The higher the numbers go over 10fps, the more misses you see. Lote When I understood correctly, the 30fps are with electronic shutter mode only where rolling shutter is prominent due to the slow read out speed of the Canon sensor.
Rolling shutter would also be an issue on the XT4 for certain applications. The AF system of the R3 would certainly provide more benefit and likely result in more usable frames in burst mode. Well, it’s of course correct to attempt not to do so, but we’re genetically wired to judge–not just people–by looks. I ordered one to complement my 5D mk IV for birding and to dip my toes to the R system reasonably cheaply since I already have a pile of EF lenses.
Preliminary end-user comments look fairly promising; it’s not a perfect camera, but the drawbacks look like something I can live with. And if I’m more disappointed than I think I will be, I expect to be able to resell it with fairly small loss.
I ended up loving the R5 so much more that I could not even fathom stepping back to the 5D4 for anything. I ended up trading it for RF glass. My advice if you tippy-toe into mirrorless, you end up spending more. What a cool write up. I really appreciate that type of comparison, thanks. Camera’s that have no optical viewfinders and even budget phones without headphone jacks.
Welcome in ‘ The image circle of speedboosters don’t have margins that tight, it generally works if only a few percentages off, because they need to deal with certain models mostly fast lenses that may have severe vignetting due to oblique entry angles.
A new Canon camera with an old sensor. I don’t see here what’s new from Canon They have been doing it for decades. Maybe why mess with a winning formula?. Canons focusing is spot on, touch screens are first rate.
Screens are very bright and color accurate, ergonomics are near perfect. WiFi and Bluetooth work perfectly. Menu system is so easy to navigate and well organized. Wats0n what heck does all that have to do with the sensor? You think the old sensor is what makes the screens “bright and accurate? Canon leads camera sales solely due to the name recognition and people stuck into the system due to lenses and equipment.
Canon cameras are usually among the most expensive on the market regardless of the tech inside. So instead of acting as if it’s okay to have an outdated sensor, you should be asking Canon to push the market forward instead of relying on consumers like yourself to pay a premium for a name. Opinions rendered as facts……. Those small lenses on the big mount look so ugly. Sorry, Canon. Especially with a prime.
Not sure what else you would want? Grip – yes i shoot a lot of sports in portrait orientation FPS with older glass – i have mk1 IS mm 2. Which is limited to 6. As an owner of a 7D mkII, I can confirm that the R7 surpasses in every way the image quality, and by far the focus accuracy for wildlife photography. When I use my mm f4 first generation , 6. I ordered an R7 and will no doubt have a long wait , with my 7DmkII to be my backup.
The 7DmkII is unquestionably a very nice camera to work with, but I get too many AF misses shooting basketball and football. I shoot sports in JPEG, so the buffer shouldn’t be a problem for me. The R7 has a much bigger buffer than the 7DII. October I bought a Canon 30D and f2. Granted the lens is a stop slower. However with todays sensors, IBIS and camera processors that one-stop difference would hardly be noticed.
Arguably better image quality than 16 years ago. Lighter weight. Almost identical APSC focal length. This would be a freakin bargain setup adjusted for inflation. A stop is a stop, being “arguably better” than 16 years ago at a higher price should be unacceptable for most electronics.
Canon care too much about ergonomic than aesthetics. But these day people want to be pretty while taking picture. Can’t tell if you’re sarcastic or not, are you saying this body is ugly? Don’t get me wrong, Canon ergonomic is always nice, but the old mindset need to fly away.
Fujifilm is example about good ergonomic but still I could see this with the slower lightweight RF f5. Still getting more pixels on target there than with a 61MP body in crop mode even. Definitely not a perfect camera – however with prices as they are it seems pretty good vfm – and a capable replacement for a 7D2 with the 3 things I wanted taken care of addressed more mp, much better af, better low light.
I thought Canon hated Mirrorless. I remember when Canon photographers mocked the Sony Mirrorless cameras. Welcome to the world of Mirrorless. I guess adopt to change or get left behind. Then he can say the writing is on the wall. There’s no need to spread bad information. There’s enough of that going on in this world already. How few of them? Why did you think Canon hated mirrorless? I’ve shot Canon since , when I got the A The idea that Canon is only just getting into mirrorless is very silly, and something it seems only Sony fans say.
I don’t recall Canon, the company “hating” mirrorless and I think what DSLR users were mocking was not mirrorless but the overzealous mirrorless fans who went on and on about them like they were the second coming. Mirrorless is an evolution of the digital camera, nothing more, nothing less. You missed the fun discussions when Sony launched the first “full frame” mirrorless back in Canon never hated mirrorless, they just wanted to suck the last dime out of the DSLR users.
Where the R3 beats it in every way. Along the way I kept trying mirrorless. Got a G1 took 5 shots, gave it to the kid. Fuji began acknowledging VF lag and began to claim 5ms.. I understood very early that mechanical Viewfinders and mirrors were going in time to be replaced by EVF, just had to wait until they were ready. They are pretty good now, though they could still be improved.
Half of me doesn’t want to consider going back to Canon, but this camera looks pretty good for what I shoot. Why not the R6 or R7? I almost never look at it on the R.
I really don’t understand the fuss people make about whether a camera has one or not. I should have specified that the top LCD is very useful for working pros. For me, it’s practically invaluable bc the act of physically lifting the camera and looking through the EVF–or worse yet–opening the screen can be very distracting to other people.
They know the utility of the little LCD screen for an important segment of their products. For me, I adjust the settings using the top lcd often, especially If the subject can shift between moving or stationary.
I know custom functions and banks can be used, but personally, I really appreciate being able to adjust my aperture shutter speed and monitor my ISO without raising the thing in front of me.
EduPortas to add to your list, Fujifilm X-H1 and X-H2S also have an electronic ink top display which is always on even if the camera is off. I don’t think opening a flip screen distracts people because most people can’t see the screen behind the body, but if they’ve gone the std swivel route then it’s the result of their self-sabotage. I meant people who are looking at you as a photographer. Nothing is more distracting for the subject than wondering what the heck your as a photographer are doing behind your screen and fiddling around with different settings.
That top LCD saves at least one step in the adjustment process before shooting. I use top LCDs on both my cameras extensively and would feel lost without it now. Both on DSLR or mirrorless. Well, this isn’t about Fujifilm.
It’s more about Canon. A feature that was more or less common LCD top screen in their average cameras is now exclusive to their top-of-the-line products. That’s my gripe. I don’t like losing using features that were once useful and be forced to pay a considerable amount more to get them. The protruding evf is about as deep as the mirror box of a dslr but it being on the opposite side of the grip makes the cameras as a whole deeper!
I had the R7 a few times in my hand, but it lacks weathersealing no rubber gasket at the battery and memory card door and it feels really plastic. The back dial around the joystick isn’t as bad as it looks like for my thumb.
It is better located than the normal spot on the back. Lack of build quality will keep me away. I like purchasing “overbuilt” products, of many kinds. Experience and a sense of value are just as important as features and performance to me. I’ve pre ordered 25th May still waiting. It should replace my 7dmk2 no problems there.
I was very enthusiastic at the time after years of failed rumours but since those days and the XH2s now out and available and the excellent mm lens This is what I was expecting for my 7dmk2 replacement. Even the OM-1 is a phenomenal alternative. Considering the latest news on delivery it might be end of August which would make the wait 3 months I can’t see myself waiting for it.. That is one ugly camera. And before you pop off about the aesthetics of tech not mattering – do your research. Design matters.
Yes, design matters. And it seems to be very well designed. As for whether it’s ugly, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What cameras do you consider to be beautiful? And I think it’s more likely that you’ll get mockery and scorn than wrath. You say something silly, so you get laughed at. I’m certainly laughing here. Damn, I guess now I must stop using things like Vi and Emacs, since they don’t have beautiful aesthetics.
My employer recently swapped out my Lenovo thinkpad for a Surface laptop 4, they do exactly the same task yet one is far more pleasurable to spend that time with than the other, and that is down to the design. This is a really nice looking camera, and if it handles anything like the R6 they hit a home run on feel. It is beautiful. I think the small-diameter lens makes it looks weird in proportion. Otherwise, it is pointless. Stuart Which Mercedes in the last 10 years would you consider beautiful?
Fabulous pieces of engineering, comfortable as anything to sit in, but from the outside, not particulary pretty in my opinon. There are much prettier cars out there, a good few of them not anything like as good as a Mercedes to drive or ride in. Likewise, what camera are you looking at and thinking thats a beautiful astheticly pleasing thing. I can’t think of one. For ergonomics and handling, thats a different thing, but its also very subjective and going from the comments sections on DPR an impossibility to get agreement on.
Ill ignore the fact i use Fuji which some would consider a fashion statement rather than a camera and leave them out of the discussion so as not to go down the route of fan boyism. Ill compare this Canon to say a Nikon Z I think the Nikon both ergonomically and visually looks a much nicer camera, as do most Panasonic and Olympus. Sony’s newer A7 series look pretty nice although people say they aren’t comfortable. This Canon looks like someone has inflated my D with a bike pump.
As for cars, the A class Mercedes look stunning, far nicer than most other cars in that class Golf, A3, Focus etc , a couple of their crossover SUVs look very stylish too. Ergonomically probably, visually — meh.
Let’s leave it as a matter of taste, OK? IMHO, the only wrong thing in terms of the ergonomics with R7 is the fact they turned the magnifier button to the right as it originally was in R. It still p! I’m looking forward to switching to R6 where this issue was fixed among others.
Looks doesn’t even make the list when I am buying a camera, does it meet my needs is number one and how does it feel in the hand is number 2. For me the original 7D was my favourite camera from the moment I picked it up. No other camera has felt that right in my hand since. I haven’t held an R7, so I will reserve judgement on that. That said, I’d take an E-Class Jag over anything else, just because. Frankly, I always thought that Canon cameras look better than Nikon’s and most recently, the Canon R3 blows the Nikon Z9 out of the water in terms of esthetics and probably ergonomics as well.
I think that is also true with an R5-Z7II comparison. The Canon comes out on top. Although I have an R5, my primary wildlife body is a Z9 because functionality is far more important than looks. I wanted the R3 but have no regrets waiting and going with the Z9. After all, I’m capturing images. I gave up trying to look good behind a camera 30 years ago. Just look at the sales figures of dedicated cameras over the past 10 years, almost wholly eaten by camera-phones, which have a lot of aesthetics lavished on them.
Most phones are just generic rectangular pieces of glass, plastic and metal with a screen and not particularly memorable aesthetically IMHO. I’d say it’s mostly their pocketable size and ability to largely replace a number of other tools, including basic cameras, for casual use that makes them so successful. I see. So you’re both the beauty police and the spelling police it’s ‘Alastair’, not ‘Alistair’, as it says right on the post you were replying to. Thanks for making my point for me. XT has its top panel arranged as if trying to provoke trypophobias.
The EVF has at least 4 extra pointed corners than necessary, the dials are a huge cluttered mess, I shiver at the thought of the sight. You say inflated? I said it before and will say it again, it looks like a dead body that’s been floating in a river for 2 days, the way the EVF is completely isolated and completely protrudes from the mount, and how they’ve caringly curved the logo, that’s far more bloated than this and I could hardly think of an uglier EVF besides the Fuji’s.
Unless what’s important to one is making an impression on others, what research is there to be done? Aesthetics is a subjective matter. The important thing to me is that it will do what I want it to do as easily as possible.
If it does that, it’s well designed. That’s something Canon does have a habit of taking seriously. Ugly online or in person? In person Canon bodies are very attractive with clean lines, fonts, control placement you name it. They are tools. Ergonomics and menu are far more important to me than the appearance of the camera to others. I don’t know how many times I have had a client walk in with a camera that cost 4X the cost of the body I was shooting with As a pro After all I may be hold the camera with a lens for 10 hours in a day.
I had the 7DII for six years, and never filled the buffer. I don’t expect to fill the buffer on the R7 either if my preorder is ever filled. The biggest problem I have and i believe many others have is the want to have a truly portable set of zoom lenses with a decent PQ step up particularly with respect to DR and low light especially in the range from around mm to about mm.
If canon or Fuji or Sony wanted to, they could better the performance of micro four thirds PQ, with aps-c zoom lenses made in nearly the same compact size. I would appreciate it if my questions above, to DP review would be deleted, as they have been resolved.
A scientifically sound camera. From the marketing perspective. My take. The R7 and R3 are completely different cameras targeting entirely different markets; the R3 is 4x the price of the R7. But the R7 looks to be an excellent camera nonetheless. This attempts to stand out are only produce a lot of low quality designs and brings nothing good to the company and the users.
For an examle R6 as a great and solid camera with an ugly design which people just don’t want to own. Fancy Termite “For an examle R6 as a great and solid camera with an ugly design which people just don’t want to own. Fancy Termite, I bet you like those square boxy cameras that resemble the folded metal bodies from the s. Any camera today with a fake shap edge pentaprism hump is a joke in my book, designed for old-timers to feel nostalgic. A tools should be comfortable to grip, they have figured out how to manufacture cameras with curves that fit your hand, no need to hold a minecraft or lego inspired lump for hours.
R6 looks good to me. A7IV looks good to me. Z6II looks good to me. I tend to attach esteem to the images that come out, not how the camera looks though my RXVI is my sexiest-looking camera. That’s why a lot of people cry out loud when they buy it. What nonsense.
I think canon R series best deisgn is on RP, EVF doesn’t protude too high and shooting mode knob is burried flat yet easy to access, the camera is cheap but looks and feel expensive, battery door looks not as solid but that’s replaceable part so no issue there.
Sony 50MP 1″ sensors are now being used in smartphones, so it’s possible. Canon uses Sony sensors in most of their1″ G series cameras already.
But I can’t focus MF lenses on my 7D so this little thing could be useful anyway. Way more useful than my joyfully-disappeared M5.
Well, little that I use is “designed” for any particular camera, but scrounging and adapting keeps one young! Besides my ancient G3 compact it’s significantly smaller than any of the cameras I own, so I don’t know what they are then.
Compared to what? Have you held an R7. I had a chance to hold and use both an R7 and R10 last month. Both are small and light cameras for intertangle lens cameras. I don’t plan on buying one, but I was pleased on how well they handled. At some point you need a minimum size to use with a telephoto lens. Considering the AF modes on these cameras, both will be used by wildlife and sports enthusiasts.
Maybe the young lady has small hands. Does look like they managed to keep the lens close to full frame size. I wish that it was a bit larger with a few more buttons. If I wanted a pocketable, I would carry a cell phone.
Oh, I do. I’ve never understood this “professional APS-C” thing. The R7 seems about as far as you can go without building something that will never line up well with the lenses offered. The 7D had a substantially higher pixel density than the FF cameras of the time, so did the D RF is just as heavy as can be hanging on your neck, while FF will choke your neck and provide free backpain.
I don’t see it that way. As it’s now, I’m not sure if it’s a good idea to replace the 7d2 – especially if shooting in demanding enviroments despite the clear advances of the R7 regarding AF capabilities, more MP and maybe high ISO noise at least no worse from what I’ve seen to date. It was a similar discussion when the 90D was released which wasn’t a replacement of the 7d2 either.
Please let Canon know. Also, those who seem to be buying the R7 in droves. I guess people did not get your memo since the R7 is almost impossible to find in stores. Plus the hi-res sensor does move the camera above the high-MP FF cameras for reach equiv. Alas the antique EVF would just kill it for me I was surprised when I used a R7. Not great, but usable. Jon Nevermind – at least the X-H2s would feature a confirmed 5. The Z9 with “just” 3. And i guess, the X-H2 non-S would feature the same, 5.
Alam12 One other thing to note about your comment, is reach. That on the crop sensor gives you mm reach. You can spend a lot more to get a R5 and dumb it down to a 15mp crop. This camera is filling a void, and the amount of back orders Canon has for the R7 would suggest maybe Canon understands a thing or two.
I wouldn’t say you get mm reach on the , you do get that FoV crop but an R5 could crop to So allowing for the II being great wide-open I’d go with 1. With either you’re probably cropping for most wildlife. But it isn’t really an issue as the R5 and R7 are in different price leagues I think there is an huge fallacy in those wanting to compare Canon DSLR lineup to what we should expect in their evolving mirrorless one. I simply look at it like this, both will stand on their own merits.
BackToNature1: Yea, it very much seems as though Canon is trying to consolidate their lineups in mirrorless a bit more than they did with their DSLR lineup. It makes sense in a shrinking market. I don’t think a lot of people understand that the dedicated interchangeable lens camera market is totally different from the market.
Today’s market is a fraction of the size of the past. I see the R7 as a way for Canon to provide an upgrade path for the xxD users, not the 7Dx users, but if some buy they will be happy.
I also see the R10 as a path for Rebel users. I had an opportunity in June to play with both with a Canon Tech rep.
She was very clear that price was a major factor in the feature set. Maybe if the new Fuji is successful this might change. Personally I don’t think there is a big enough market for 2. K Rocks, thanks for pointing out the elephant in the room, namely the dramatically different size and nature of the ILC market these days. In , the market was literally at least 10 times as large as it is today. That changes every company’s strategy dramatically. The past can be an interesting comparison, but we need to also acknowledge that the market has changed and move on.
Looks like another winner from Canon -good specs and good price; time for Sony and Nikon to bring out new equivalents. When I met with a Canon rep over a month ago, the R7 sensor was a main topic of conversation.
Several people were unhappy Canon had not developed a new stacked or BSI sensor. The rep was very blunt and said the decision was made based on cost. If Canon had developed a new advanced sensor the cost would have been over 2K.
Personally I was disappointed for several reasons. Just a few variations on the same theme. I was planning my move to Sony for mirrorless. The newer Canon sensors changed my mind. The rolling shutter issues on the R7 ES seems enough to limit its usage on moving subjects. Remembering not all those pixels get used for the image.
Acdsee ultimate 10 pixel targeting free.Photo Studio Professional 2022
Color and Luminance Range Pixel Targeting, Smart Brushing Creative Tools. Photo Effects, Color Overlay, Gradient Map, Soft Focus, Add Grain Editing Workflow Tools. Develop Presets, Edit History, Snapshot Archives, Easy Undo/Redo. . Jun 30, · ACDSee Photo Studio Ultimate $ which makes more sense unless you’re going for a pixel-art effect. You also get a decent choice of resolutions targeting both big screens and. Dec 14, · What’s New in ACDSee Ultimate ? Color Wheel for Pixel Targeting. You get 2GB free and pay $89 per year for 50GB or $69 for 10GB. To be fair, those plans do include application updates.
Acdsee ultimate 10 pixel targeting free
ACDSee Gemstone Photo Editor 12 has all the artistry and layered prowess you need to satisfy your photo editing desires, no matter how complex the composition. For maximum productivity, the MDI Multi-Document Interface layered editor allows you to carve your images into full spectrum splendor. With an intuitive design, and presets for everything from creating files to fine-tuning colors, the Gemstone Photo Editor will polish your design workflow. Featured in this tutorial:.
RAW File Support for over camera models. View supported cameras here. When the next version of the software is released you can choose to upgrade to the new version at special upgrade pricing, or continue using your current version. Thank you for your honest feedback. You continue to be an integral part of shaping not only Gemstone, but all ACDSee products and we are forever grateful for that. Cheers to you! Are you an ACDSee beginner or expert? Either way, check out our Video Tutorial Resource Center for tips, tricks and tutorials!
Stay informed. We have something for everyone who is interested in digital photography and photo editing. Want to learn more about ACDSee in a live, interactive setting? Sign up for the next workshop! Login to your acdID account to view exclusive upgrade pricing. To activate your software, to validate your subscriptions, or to access online services, you will need a valid email address and an internet connection. Online Help User Guide. Gemstone Photo Editor Select your subjects with a click Quickly remove unwanted backgrounds in photos Blur image backgrounds with ease Instantly turn the background of your photo Black and White.
Level up your productivity You know what they say — two document tabs are better than one. Clean and uninhibited interface Open multiple files at the same time View or edit in a split view or child view Universal tool settings across document tabs.
System Requirements To activate your software, to validate your subscriptions, or to access online services, you will need a valid email address and an internet connection. Go to Top.