Canon had a similar issue with the 1Dsmk3 - lubricating oil came loose and went in the sensor. Canon fixed this FOC for all owners.
Big Mac 15: I have a D800e and D7000. Am disappointed at the UK price of this camera - but $2099 is great for US customers (should be around £1400 but Nikon are not the only company which exploits UK customers. The price differential is so high might be worth a trip to New York with the wife to get one - holiday and camera in one go!) . The price for me means I won't be rushing out to replace my D7000. More likely to look at a NEX-6 or Fuji X-E1. Money is tight for many people in the UK and they may look at cheaper mirrorless cameras for their next purchase at half the price or less. I appreciate the specs/abilities are different but unless you have unlimited funds for camera purchases, price can influence choice. I think Nikon have missed a trick in the UK trying to retain their customer loyalty.
US$2099 is GBP1300 at todays exchange rate. Add 20% VAT and you have GBP1560. Yes, still alot lower than the headline price - but the street price usually compensates a fair bit too.
Remember US prices are always displayed without sales tax included.
Yves P.: The English people are at all time very much polite, Freedom is a privilege ...
Laws vary from one country to another but the politeness seen here is also different than what you would see in the States for example where it would turn into an arrest (for no apparent reason too). Photographers are not Terrorists, Terrorists are Terrorists ...
In theory - yes you have that right. In theory. Most of the US and the world for that matter are living in a version of The Matrix when it comes to 'rights'
For a minute I thought you took it with a pre-production camera :-)
RickBuddy wrote: > > > 2RickBuddy:> > Get real. Do not slip into over-moralistic levels. Anyway, your opinion is your opinion, thanks. And your judgement driven by prejudice and anger does not insult me, really. I wish you a good luck.> >> > It is not over-moral to point out that an insensitive hack reveals a stereotypical stigma of the disease.> > Nor is it over-moral to point out that these stigmas make life immensely more difficult for those who suffer from bi-polar condition, and serve as a barrier to treatment.> > I lost a job because the stigma over my bi-polar condition. Your portrayal of the condition reflects a few of the nasty prejudices that people hold against manic-depressives. I know the consequences of your ignorance. No. No. No. I am not over-moralizing.> > I'm just pointing out a prejudiced, ignorant lout who doesn't care what people who suffer feel.> > I have a great job now in the creative arts, make really good money, have a great counselor, have a wonderful support network.> > Try sometime to see the beauty and majesty of the impact of those who not only suffer — but also harness the power of the bi-polar condition: John F. Kennedy, Winston Churchill, Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Florence Nightingale, Ludwig van Beethoven, Alexander the Great, (Here's a link: http://www.mdf.contactbox.co.uk/info_packs/org/genius.htm).> > Will you ever match that greatness?> > And what do you do? You put them at the end of a rope and call it art.
Sorry - but there are no limits to art. And you prove the point very eloquently - it has provoked a debate.
I'd love to hear how this shot was composed :-)