Pat Cullinan Jr: The signal-to-noise ratio could stand improvement. Do you agree?
>Have you considered at the excellent range of Canon compacts?
No, but I got a lot of good use from my T2i, especially with RAW.
fastlass: I'm probably speaking for most of us when I say that Nikon seems to have poisoned 200 years of photography with this move.
HowaboutRAW, I have a notion that you are smart. Perhaps too smart for this windowless saloon of a forum. ;) ;) ;)
I think Guy Swarbrick deserves a round of applause from everyone for the generosity with which he gave his time and bestowed his expertise in answering so many of our posts. His professionalism at all levels is plain to see.
Thank you very much, Guy.
--Pat Cullinan, Jr.
>If you want a good high ISO body get a Df, D4s, or the Canon 6D.
Now that is news I can use. I'll be thinking about the 6D.
The signal-to-noise ratio could stand improvement. Do you agree?
DenWil: I guess I'm lucky to be the only photographer in the world who does not have any use for time exposures in, lol, crop mode.
I only shoot elephant stampedes, so none of this concerns me.
A huge crack has opened in front of my house a mile wide and getting bigger every second.
ThatCamFan: Please stop EFFING up already Nikon, Canon is does PROPER quality control tests apparently, not Nikon. I am saving up for a Nikon but you are REALLY making me question my choice.
>they weren't trouble-free
For sure. I remember when a man came storming into the Zeiss office on Fifth Avenue with a Contarex that wasn't working right.
sdh: None of those photos made me think, "Wow you can't get that with an APS-C, pardon me, DX, sensor DSLR.
That said I enjoyed the photos themselves.
What's 14k4? 14.4k?
What's PJ? Photojournalism?
--Dumb in Brooklyn
Not to take selfies.
That is the Law.
Are we not men?
A propos of nothing, that is the ugliest animal I ever saw in my whole life since I was born.
drummercam: Mr. Slater owns the work. Once he saw what was happening and allowed the macaque to continue what it was doing, the macaque became a mere assistant. This is a shameless power grab by a huge organization with money to pay a slick lawyer to present a wholly specious argument if it comes down to a court case. Wikimedia should take the photo down, and Mr. Slater should pay the macaque a banana.
Right you are.
Make it two bananas?
Proceeds belong to the producer, viz. Slater.
This opinion was inspired by Nigel Wilkins.
Nigel Wilkins wrote:IMO it's the guy who owns the camera since he initiated the photography.
[Whew. So far no one has said anything about "the Monkey's RAW."]
Almeida: What is the equivalent aperture godmanit?!
Yep, I agrees wif Leandros S. I'm as smart as kin be and I don'ts needs no edumacation from no buddy.
Blubbida blubbida blubbida blubbida blubbida aperture blubbida blubbida DOF blubbida blubbida blubbida EV blubbida blubbida zungadud. And let that be the end of it.
SW Anderson: Back to the future with a much better and more appropriate classic retro look -- one of the original Q's enjoyable features. For me, the Q-S1 isn't a matter of whether, but when, I'll get one.
For the Q's sniping detractors, photography for many of us isn't all about big, slick-magazine covers and two-page spreads. We'll never do billboards and might never indulge in exhibition-size prints. We can enjoy on-screen and small-print images, along with using a good-looking, well-made camera that provides an amazingly feature-rich, flexible shooting experience with easy portability. Some of our best images are more about a memory captured or scene preserved than impressive resolution and amazing sharpness seen via pixel peeping.
My Q is fun and useful in many picture-taking situations where my big, bulky but technically superior DSLR would be as out of place as a semi-truck at a gymkhana. Some folks seem to enjoy the Q as a target for put-downs. I see that as their loss, not mine.
To: SW Anderson
Hmm, you write like a writer. Kind of anomalous around here.
This place reminds me of any number of windowless saloons in Oklahoma.
Omigosh, Richard, the Pentax store website does offer "toy lenses." Ugh, they call that marketing?
Adorama does a good job turning up better Q-mount lenses. See http://www.adorama.com/l/Lenses/Mirrorless-Lenses?sel=Lens-Mount_Pentax-Q
The lenses are not toys, the Q system makes practical sense, and the experience is satisfying.
neil holmes: 2.7x focal length multiplier?
You're right, it has to be a typo.
NetMage: So wanted them to include a viewfinder...
You'd have to use hotshoe OVF's. $$$