smafdy: Boy, I sure hit a nerve.
Here's a good breakdown of professional photography incomes in the US (from the BLS):
In the US, the cost of this camera, at current conversion rates, would be $49,543.49
Note, that the highest decile income for US professional photographers is $66,360.
Good luck getting a bank to lend you $50K, based on a $66K income.
Don't hate on me, hate on reality.
Disclosure: I'm fairly well above the earnings of the top decile, so JDThomas' criticism of me seems to be based on little more than prejudicial disdain:
"you lack the talent, drive, contacts, or whatever, that there aren't thousands of photographers around the world working for a day rate that compares to your annual salary."
Name ONE, other than Annie L..
No, the equivalent is this: I've decided you're a douchebag and not worth my time. That is all.
Didn't read. There was no working link...
beavertown: This company is dying.
Apple survived because they got a cash infusion from Microsoft...
I think what RPJG is saying is that your statistic is misleading. It's incomplete--it would have been useful to include a range of incomes and the associated min and max.
I didn't catch a tinge of aggression on his post so why reply with such disdain?
Matt1645f4: If he went out there with the intention of allowing the Monkey to use his equipment and see what the results would be would he still be the copyright owner?
I would of thought yes. As it would of been his creative intention that lead to the images capture. And i can't see much difference in this argument that would deny him his copyright.
This does question the right of copyright. If i was to go and make a Photograph of another photo would this entitle me to the copyright, as i would of created a new and unique image?
The copyright laws are pretty clear on these matters.
As for you taking a photo of a photo, you own the copyright on your photo but not on the photo you photographed.
rjjr: Who holds the copyright on the photos when a camera is set up in a forest and the shutter is triggered by a motion detector?
Read the article above and you might get a hint...
TakisL: It's not an SLRbut an SLT camera. Don't confuse them.....
What's the difference again?
new boyz: Never heard of that "Gaussian bokeh" before. The next weekend project it seems.
Here's an example from back in 2009: http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/stf-mode-in-maxxum-7-recreated-for-dslrs_topic54569_page1.html
Unengaging shooting experience... care to explain that one?
yabokkie: I think E-M1 is a much better camera to use than E-M5 (though the on-sensor phase detection AF doesn't perform well and shadowed by the technical break-through of dual-pixel AF). the design of E-M5 is really bad, maybe second only to E-P1.
for the budget-friendly one, E-PM2 performs better and is sold for a much lower price than G6 though I'd like to have a grip and 60p.
Do you consider the $1300 E-M1 to be a mid-range camera?
rb59020: My D5200 is better.
The one you've got is always better than the one you don't have.
It's way better than the one you can never have.
Juck: Nice, but Alpha 7 is much better.
@Juck: Why do you say that? As far as IQ is concerned there's not a whole lot of difference. The A7 might be a little better but not much better.
psn: The top looks like Nikon pulled ideas from other classic cameras instead of sticking with their own. It's good that they're looking back but I think they didn't look deep enough inside themselves. I don't feel the Nikon soul... it's more like they looked back at the Fujifilm X100 and Sony RX cameras.
"Hey, look, I really like a separate exposure mode dial and I will put it next to the shutter release button. Also, the exposure compensation dial on the X100 and the RX looked pretty cool but I don't have enough room so I think I'll stick on top of the ISO dial."
Dig deeper Nikon. I heard David Beckham's got an NEX-7... I mean a Hasselblad Lunar. It's a Hasselblad!
Oh, now it's about what classic Nikon you own, huh?
Since you wanted to count... I have an F, FM, FM2, FE2, FA but not the F3. But don't tell me you still don't see the glaring differences? I mean, man, they are glaring differences. GLARING.
Here let me help you...The FA top view:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b4/Nikon-fa-top.jpg/800px-Nikon-fa-top.jpg
The FE2 top view:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f8/Nikon_FE2_2.jpg/800px-Nikon_FE2_2.jpg
Compare those to the Df's top view:http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-df/images/top.jpg
Now, have a look at the Fujifilm X100s and Sony RX1:http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x100s/images/comparedtox100stop.jpg
I rest my case.
(By the way, I'm not saying it's ugly. I'm just saying the top doesn't really evoke memories of a classic Nikon SLR but more a hodgepodge of ideas from other cameras)
Did you look at all those cameras before you made your comment? Look again. Really, look. Don't tell me you can't see the glaring differences between a classic Nikon SLR dial set and the Df.
The top looks like Nikon pulled ideas from other classic cameras instead of sticking with their own. It's good that they're looking back but I think they didn't look deep enough inside themselves. I don't feel the Nikon soul... it's more like they looked back at the Fujifilm X100 and Sony RX cameras.
Just wondering... if the D600 really is spraying oil into the sensor and Nikon refused to fix it, why was there no class-action lawsuit? You could have forced Nikon to fix the problem and teach them a lesson in the process. But no.
So, this makes me think it's not really a problem. At least not enough to p*ss off the majority of the D600 users. For those who are really miffed, get rid of your gear and move on... but I'm going to bet most of you will end up buying another Nikon and probably the D610.
Or maybe the people who complain about this oily mess are not really D600 users? :)
Did the USPS appeal this to the supreme court at all? I suppose it's probably cheaper to pay the award than to pay the lawyers for an appeal. Also, it sounds to me their lawyers are pretty weak...
tongki: 4,000 cameras and STILL yet can not make a good picture of him and his cameras
That's not his problem... it's the guy behind the other camera.
It may be stupid to you but it's very obviously not to Mr. Parekh. What do you have? From your response, I'd say you're just jealous.
Joe Ogiba: I still have Kodachrome 135 and 120 film in my freezer.http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5196/5842743706_b1ecffa5a1_b.jpg
@BJL: Actually you can easily process Kodachrome film... as B/W negative film using B/W chemicals. So, you don't have to keep it as souvenir.
sigala1: The cheapest entry-level DSLR is going to be a lot more practical than the most expensive "professional" film DSLR with this insert.
This concept is not really all about practicality, is it?