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.
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?
Airless: The first product Canon has ever made that wasn't a blatant ripoff of another company...oh wait, nevermind
Not just plants... biological discoveries and processes, in general. How can one patent our own DNA! And then there's math and the software patents.
Madness, this patent business has become. I can foresee patent wars not waged by businesses but by countries... on the other hand, I just watched a few episodes on Continuum.
utomo99: Manufacturer need to study eagle eyes and other animal eyes. to create great lens. I believe new lens technology can be found by study the animal eyes
You didn't study hard enough or you would have found that octopus (and squid) do have lenses in their eyes... it's not just a pinhole.
RichRMA: I can hardly wait to see the back-peddling by all those Canon and Nikon users who slagged Foveon in the past.
@raincoat: I doubt you'd say that if you really know anything about sensors. Sigma's current Foveon sensor is pretty darn good. It's hard to top it if you're into portraiture and landscape photography.
I suggest you look at some images taken with SD-1 or one of the DP Merrill cameras. Open your eyes and you'll see better.
Pronounce it however you want. If someone doesn't know what a GIF or a Jif is, that's their problem.
Mr. Wilhite looks a little too rigid to me. Perhaps he needs to pull that stick out...