JacquesBalthazar: Beautiful machine! This is indeed a really impressive technological showcase of a tool.
This is the whole story in a nutshell.
cheetah43: With its design it belongs to Goddam City.
You know, I have an F3 corroding away in a drawer. When I first got it, I ran a couple of rolls of film through it and found it to be an ergonomic workout. So I bought three N2000's and was off to the races.
bobbarber: Point of view of an average schlub:
1. Don't need the I.Q.
2. Too expensive for a toy.
Very cool though, I'll admit, if you have 7 grand to throw around.
Anyone who has a Hummer needs one. No -- that's what they used to say about Corvettes.
Mebbe, mebbe not.
Wubslin: Another overblown, overdone, oversized, overweight, overpriced failure from Nikon then?
Time to stick a fork in it.
>35mm film is great, but really only through ISO 400.
That is precisely the rub about film -- the limited speeds. I shot film for decades, and was glad to put it aside and take up digital. I make an exception for medium and large format film -- these can be used to make images that can be scanned to many megapixels. That's why I kept my Fujifilm 690.
ngtszhodavid: seriously are they just lazy and actually need so much time to do a full review? geez...
>how you can complain about a free service
Good on them for the free revs. But we have yet to enjoy a free rev of the D4S. So let's complain. WHEEE!
Sorry to be butting in with this drivel. The D4S holds no attraction for me. I personally won't be using a camera the size of a manhole cover. Which needs flash units as big as beer coolers. Just joshing! In truth, I admire the D4S as an awesome piece of engineering.
tkbslc: Uhhh, why?
papa natas: "...horizontal and vertical angular shifts (yam and pitch)..."YAM..(?) Yummy?YAWL...Maybe.From the aerodynamic trilogy: Pitch, Yawl & Roll.
HAW HAW HAW!
wackybit: I feel bad for whoever bought the black 12mm f2 at 'limited edition' prices
S---w this "limited" ----.
John McMillin: Thank goodness that this camera finally has stabilization to correct for "yam and pitch." My attempts to get sharp photos of sweet potatoes tossed into the air have been such failures so far...
Have you tried watermelons?
jonikon: Too bad there is no EVF. That's a deal killer for enthusiasts. Using a rear LCD to compose is lame, and especially annoying in sunny conditions!
>When you place the LCD at 90 degrees and shoot at waist-level, the LCD is often protected from the sun
A helpful suggestion.
pleytime: Why would anyone buy a camera, other than a cheap pocket one, without a viewfinder?
>If you want an OLY with EVF, get something from the OM-D series.
Not a bad idea. The OM-D E-M10 goes for $650! That's only $50 more than the Pen.
tinternaut: It doesn't look too bad at all, though it's a pity they didn't include a built in flash. There are likely a lot of owners of the 12mp models, who would find this a good upgrade. At the moment, the asking price is awfully close to that of the superior EM-10.
Regarding usability, I always find it a fight to activate a number of features when I use an Olympus camera for the first time:
- There's the fight to activate SCP - The fight to activate highlight/shadow warnings- And the fight to get Large Super Fine working.
>>Dude.. honestly, i'm too lazy to check...
I find this to be
1) Funny,2) Bracingly honest.
Also, I find that even the dinkiest flash is good for fill-in purposes under tall sun. Just sayin'.
The manufacturers have ganged up and gone stingy. For steadiness, bright sunlight, or panoramas, I'll settle for any excuse of a viewfinder. The Hoodman Loupe is an intelligent alternative. So is the Clearviewer (http://www.clearviewer.com).
Pat Cullinan Jr: The optional high-definition VF-4 viewfinder adds $250 to the price.
Lots of good information in these posts.
Instead of a viewfinder, a Hoodman loupe can serve pretty well. About $80. Dangles off your neck.
Incidentally, the Hoodman website is off line for some reason (hoodmanusa.com).
The optional high-definition VF-4 viewfinder adds $250 to the price.
Just kill me. :/
Nu, vos iss noias here?
Pat Cullinan Jr: Well, it LOOKS like a camera. That's the main thing. Right?
DNA is destiny.
Ha ha! I needed to have my spirits picked up. Thanks.
I've been looking at 8x10's I had made from images I shot 10 years ago with my then new Sony P150. They look great, crammed with detail, nice color. Back in 2004, the P150 was the first consumer digicam that was capable of making 8x10's at 300dpi because of the 7MP resolution of the sensor. Nine cameras later, I'm pixel-peeping like a demon with every new camera that comes down the pike, but why? I don't know. Duh.
Well, it LOOKS like a camera. That's the main thing. Right?