jorepuusa: Wonderful pictures of war planes, but where are the pictures of US military planes bombing children and other civilians to pieces? Cannot see any. Romanticizeing killing machines feels absurd.
Christom, how do you explain the fraud in labelling worthless mortgage packages as AAA on a truly gigantic, world-altering scasle up to 2008, causing a worldwide recession that affected every country and was the worst since 1929, and requiring the bailout of the banks and their gambles by taxpayer money to the tune of trillions of USD?
Christom, how do you explain the invasion of Iraq on lies created by US politicians in contradiction to CIA intel, causing the deaths of 800 000 Iraqi civilians, 500 000 of which elicited the comment on TV from Madeleine Albright "this collateral damage was worth it". Given the choice between an admittedly heavy-handed dictator who was in fact the right man to keep Iraq together, who was secular and virulently opposed to fundamentalist religious groups (Al Qaeda ring a bell?), had nothing to do with 911 and under whom ISIS would never have gained support in Iraq (after having being created by the US in Syria with USD 500 million worth of arms) who admittedly killed 5000 Kurds with gas weapons supplied by the US, or chaos in Iraq due to US destruction of the status quo and 800 000 dead civilians, which would you choose?
Paul Farace: So I see these images in the same positive light I see WWII Allied planes, defenders of freedom. And they sadly killed thousands of women and children. But my brain is able to comprehend complexities and nuances that some of your leftist brains cannot. All of the recent drone strikes have not killed more than one WWII bombing mission and at the same time have killed many monsters who would behead the dumazzez commenting below.
Paul, how about the 800 000 Iraqi civilians killed for no particularly good or truthful reason, 500 000 of which elicited the comment on TV by Madeleine Albright that "the collateral damage was worth it"?
(Continuation of rant): I believe that the Allied forces recognised that both Fascism and Communism were terrible social systems, and opted to support the Russians as German economic growth was seen to be the differentiating threat, the Russians could be dealt with later (which they were). In turn, the Germans were fearful of being overwhelmed by a system that was capable of causing 20-30 million deaths in Ukraine and crushing the power of the individual. My view of these photos is that they are part of a war machine that for instance killed 800 000 Iraqi civilians for no good reason, on lies created by the politicians in direct contrast to the actual CIA intel, and that the Americans have effectively become the new Nazis.
Yes, Paul, defenders of one particular kind of freedom. There is substantial evidence, in particular in the book "Icebreaker" by Russian researcher Viktor Suvorov, indicating that Russia in 1941 was preparing to roll across Europe all the way to the Atlantic. They had printed 5 million translation booklets for their troops in Russian, German and French with phrases like "Do not send zat telegram or I vil shoot you" and "do not vorry, ze Red Army is nearby". Their forces were in close attack formation, leaving them vulnerable to attack, instead of in spread-out defensive positions which according to military doctrine would have required 3 x the force to overcome them.
Frank C.: can't wait to see Sony kill the resale value of today's uber-expensive 'old school' lenses....and all it took was a lil ol' bending machine and probably some WD-40! LOL Lens manufacturers must have had their "uh ohhh..." moment by now ;_)
Yes, they will. The surface of perfect focus of most lenses (legacy and new) is concave, ie shaped similarly to this curved sensor. Plus incident light at the edge of the curved sensor is closer to 90 degrees.
Jan, have you tried View NX? Like DPP, it is free (for Nikon), but most operations are literally 10x slower. Let us be thankful for small mercies.
h2k: Don't know if it's nice to expose a trivial failure in such a prominent way.
At least DPRs doesn't seem worried that the next test models might arrive with a delay.
One of their problems was that for the full duration of the war they were tinkering with and changing tank models instead of taking the Russian route of building one main tank model for the duration. More tanks were immobilised through breakdowns and lack of spare parts than through battle.
Is the car a Singer? Anybody have more info?
DPReview, please correct the grammar: German, not Germany.
Confirmation of my opinion that Leica IQ is not the higher quality the price would imply, I checked the Leica 35mm M (full frame) on Photozone. Centre/edge lp/ph at best aperture is 3600/2400, and Canon 135mm f2 on full frame is 3600/3300. I'd rather pay 30% of the Leica price, and get IS thrown in.
NAwlins Contrarian: Somewhere out there a class-action plaintiffs' lawyer is searching for a client on whose behalf he can file a lawsuit claiming he was duped by Leica's [apparently, based on what's reported here] untrue claims of optical correction, thereby being willfully and wantonly lured into buying a mediocre lens for a high price, and of course suffering grievous emotional distress.
Which is, of course, not to deny that it appears that Leica has been busted in making deceptive claims.
I think if you got a mediocre lense, "grievous emotional distress" would be an understatement, more like GBH, grievous bodily harm.
Strange coincidence, just yesterday I was reading about details (and reading the actual court application handed in 3 days ago) of a class action brought by attorneys Zimmerman in the US re the D600. Links are on the Nikonrumours.com site.
To put the expenditure at Sochi into perspective, the cost of USD 51 billion is equivalent to 50% of the annual govt expenditure of my country, South Africa (population 50 million). Putin and his friends in the construction business have had a field day.
This design shows up the Nikon Df design with it's dials at different heights, faux leatherette moulding on the side of the hump and busy front of hump. Full marks to Fujifilm for it's exquisite design.
undergrounddigga: Funny that, every other company is trying to emulate Oly's design of the OMD .. whilst Oly users wish they had a mirrorless (PEN) camera with the viewfinder in the corner :)(or perhaps people would want both type of cameras).
I'm not a fuji user, but from a design point I much prefer X100 or X-E than this.X100 with its dual viewfinder is just stunning, only if they released a 50mm (FF equivalent) F1.4 with speedy autofocus ..
What is this film you speak of?
forpetessake: Just one thing missing -- they need to add a swiveling LCD screen and more convenient buttons. Basically if they take a typical compact camcorder and use the lens, the sensor, and other guts from QX and they will have a winner.
@howardroark: I live in daily hope that some time in the next few years I will spot a positive, constructive and non-sarcastic comment from you.
Stephan K: At the risk of criticising the efforts of my countrymen, just checked the camera sensor ratings on DXOMark, top rated sensor is the Nikon D800 at 96, Leica M Typ 240 is at 84, identical to the lower-end consumer Nikon D5200 at 1/20th of the price. Vanity knows no price. At the price Leica charges, they should be at the top of the list.
@HowardRoark: This comment from the website "Lensrentals" by physician-turned-lens renter Roger Cicala, who rents, maintains and tests an inventory of 50 000 lenses: " DxoMark has nice graphs for each lens that show distortion, vignetting, chromatic aberration, and resolution at various focal lengths and apertures for each lens they test". To whose opinion do I give more weight: your sarcastic one-liner, or Roger's?
Please explain why you think DXO sensor scores are not useful. I may agree with you on the lens scores (one of my posts elsewhere "The DXO lens scores are inaccurate because eg they have one score for sharpness over all focal lengths and all apertures, which is nonsense, rather use sites like photozone and lenstip which have a full breakdown of this metric. In addition, for "best at", they just put the widest aperture"). In addition, your sarcastic tone is unnecessary. You could have said "No, in my opinion the DXO scores are useless, but am willing to explain why, and to debate"
You specifically mention DXO. Care to mention any other sensor rating websites?