I understand the legal logic behind Wikimedia's argument, but if they cared about anything but themselves they would not fight back against the camera owner's request. It's another example of law saving those who don't really need to be saved.
WhaleShark: dpreview has done a disservice to readers by not clearly pointing out that the D600 is a total fail as a serious video tool - even though Nikon is trying to sell it as one.
Why?1) Audio gain (& headphone level) cannot be adjusted while shooting (source: Nikon USA website)2) Aperture (and hence exposure) cannot be adjusted while shooting (source: the preview above)3) As if that wasn't enough, the Nikon website also says that the HDMI output 'may' not have the same pixel dimensions as those that you chose -- in other words, the 1080x1920 output will be what? All sorts of post-production stupidity might result from this.
I would have loved to have listened to the stream of expletives that must have been flowing from the lips of the poor suckers who had to shoot Nikon's doc-style promo videos with these. No wonder so many shots look wooden and set up.
What could have been a nice stills and video camera is actually just a nice stills camera with useless video buttons on it.
All we have is a Canon fanboy that is very embarrassed!
At long last! ;-) I'm downloading it IMMEDIATELY!
Sdaniella: 24.00p looks like fun... in a 3.2/3.6 lbs bare bodies...http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/cinema_eos_cameras
6.0/6.4 lbs fully loaded (choice) + (add lens)
rivals start at 5 - 5.3, and 10 lbs bare...
You really look like you're sapmming for Canon!You might take it easy, if you want anybody to believe you!