"The elements are held in place initially by friction, inside their TSC trays, before the TSC is heated at the edges and sealed to lock the elements into place. This type of construction replaces the much more involved traditional method where glass elements were held in place by metal bezels screwed tightly into the barrel."
So replacing front or rear element now requires replacent of the entire assembly at god knows how much the cost.
nerd2: Wow. So no tilt/flip LCD, no faster continuous shooting, nothing really new or noticeable and they charge $1200 for this? One can spend whooping $100 more and get D610 instead.
How much would you pay?
Hmm, I thought Britain is a land of video.
adhemar: Sorry, I forgot: what the purpose of that flippin thingy? Is it to spread your sensor with oil or to plaster it with dust bunnies?
Neither. It provides an ability to focus.
prossi: LOL DSLR only use is to demonstrate the power of the new shutterless/mirrorless technology.
Paraphrasing Clint Howard' character in The Waterboy - "The good Lord chose not to bless me with a fully functioning AF, but you're an inspriation to all of us who do not care to learn how to use mirror lockup!"
ecube: I am glad "Slow Mo Guy" created and posted the video. I used to repair cameras in the mid-1960s to mid-1970s but I never tire appreciating videos showing the precision of cameras.
For those who ever used Canon Pellix, in the mid-1960s, the mirror is a fixed pellicle (two-way mirror), hence, is quieter and less vibration. The comments touting the advantage of mirrorless may not be aware that their DSLR may have a mirror-up position than when used with like-view is results in essentially a mirror-less camera.
Canon tried it one more time in AF era with Canon RT.
pcworth: My old Olympus OM-1 had a horizontal shutter that looked fabric. I wonder how much the orientation (vertical vs horizontal) impacts the final image?
The main difference is that vertical shutter allows for faster shutter speeds. Cloth shutter like OM-1 or K1000 was limeted to 1/1000, vertical shutter even back in that day could go to 1/4000, although mass cameras like that (FA and FM2) showed up may be a decade later.
dangie: As Lightroom prides itself on its organising qualities it needs to have its own method of finding duplicate images, instead of having to download and pay for an external plugin.
So that it would go nuts during backups?
Suave: So, even slower and more resource hungry?
Yeah, I got a decent system.
You say it like it's not true, and LR is not a total resource hog.
So, even slower and more resource hungry?
marc petzold: What keeps me away from LT for ages: That damn catalogue everything thing, and then it's way sluggish from operation & behaviour, Adobe should really speed things up.
Because he probably follows the same path as I - install a trial version, then delete in disgust.
Wish they'd let Kata be.
Nindy5: Like if you want the biggest Andriod one eyed Loser Papi61 to take his 10000 core, 20000 mp piece of junk to leave this site and don't come back. Obviously Anyone that users Apple has absolutely no understanding of anything technical and are all brainwashed by the big evil Apple corporation and we are also racists too.... I
look at the Samsungs bloat ware graphics on any note or s model, looks like it was designed in the 90s by a uni student. The lens can't even resolve the detail of the 16mp sensor, the andriod Eco system will eventually bug the phone, restarting your phone all the time, once I moved to Apple everything worked consistently. Apple is no more expensive then the S or Note but I think people like Papi61 aren't upset about the hardware it's because most Andriod users DL using Torrent and don't want to pay for anything
Nindy, your funny.
Apple makes cameras? When I click on Cameras menu here I see none,
Suave: I admit, it's a really interesting camera, but $1300 for a matching standard zoom is a boatload of money.
All it says is that DxO has a hard-on not only for Sony (and by extension - Nikon).
Frank C.: If both mirrorless and conventional dslrs were suddenly created today, which would people flock to?
To the better promoted ones, meaning DSLRs.
I admit, it's a really interesting camera, but $1300 for a matching standard zoom is a boatload of money.
Suave: Dude, you are insane - I would love me a modern 35-105/3.5 now that I am on FF, and I used a 50 way more when I was shooting crop. As for the middle ground - of course there's one - it's owning both. And don't get me started on not buying FF lenses - most of my FF lenses now cost more than I originally paid for them (24-105 being the sole exception), the only crop lens I owned lost half its value by the time I sold it.
PS. I don't understand why everyone talks about DOF when it's features like AF that's above and beyond what absolute majority of crop can offer and much more advanced UI that really matter.
@ljmac How so? They are still FF lenses, and the reason I use some of them less is not related to FL at all - I prefer lenses that are capable of taking advantage of my body AF system. If anything I have more 50's now than I used to.
Dude, you are insane - I would love me a modern 35-105/3.5 now that I am on FF, and I used a 50 way more when I was shooting crop. As for the middle ground - of course there's one - it's owning both. And don't get me started on not buying FF lenses - most of my FF lenses now cost more than I originally paid for them (24-105 being the sole exception), the only crop lens I owned lost half its value by the time I sold it.