Boxbrownie: Try walking normally without hanging onto the camera and let it just swing, attached by one point it'll just swing around and twist about quite insecurely, this is nothing new as an invention, just another version of a failed idea, you cannot beat having two fixed points toi hang a camera from............
Kepp trying chaps!
@fuego6.....so its on a strap around your neck and shoulder and you STILL have to hold it with one hand? Not exactly what straps are for.....@Gollan......I am sure yours is fine.........
Try walking normally without hanging onto the camera and let it just swing, attached by one point it'll just swing around and twist about quite insecurely, this is nothing new as an invention, just another version of a failed idea, you cannot beat having two fixed points toi hang a camera from............
MikeF4Black: I'm very, very disappointed.
You should put your dog on a diet!
Black Box: "There is a rule in the cruise ship business that you never go on a vessel’s first voyage."
I guess that's why all major ship launches in the past 120 years had their first voyages sold out at astronomical prices. Mr. Demolger must be as knowlegeable about digital cameras as he is about cruise ships.
No, it just means there are a lot of gullible first time cruisers out there, and snobs who think being first at everything makes them special........been on any cruises lately? :)
karet: This could actually be useful in washing machines for surgical instruments or glass and utensils in pharmaceutical production units. When validating the efficacy of the machine when trying new loading patterns this could be additional proof that the water and detergent go where you want it to go.
You do not think the manufacturers already do this?
I was sealing micro video cameras inside engine inlet manifolds/oil sumps/air boxes etc etc 20 years ago, I am sure the likes of Bosch and Meile do this all the time.
Its a pity about loosing the optical finder, and a shame Canon could not have put as much effort into developing a more accurate and better OF as they have developing the LCD add-on carbuncle........er......LCD add-on viewfinder.
Lovely, Norfolk is our stamping ground for pleasure and how I wish it looked like this still.........
What's with all the RAW/JPEG tosh......that can be worked around usually.......more importantly for a semi serious underwater camera is the ring flash facility.......brilliant move Olly!
Excellent, a fun idea to make a serious point maybe?
To those who "poo poo" the pictures......try another life :)
Really? I have looked at several now and can see some nasty artifacts I assume are JPG'ing but look a lot like camera shake also......not as happy as I was really wanting to be looking at these samples.
Is there something wrong with this image (0098), seems to either be camera shake or JPEG artifact blurring, I was hoping for much better although not judging the camera on just one dodgy looking pic.
bossnas: Pure photography? LOL! Digital photography more like.
Pure photography is using light sensitive materials that you can hold in your hand, cameras that don't need batteries to function. That's taking things back to the root of the invention of photography, pure photography. Making images without the need of a computer, making prints without the need of a printer or inks. That's pure photography!
Suave, there were quite a few SLRs that had selenium cell meters, not a battery in sight! Maybe you do not go back that far? ;)
It's nice to dream, but if it's true and it looks and handles as well as an FM/FE/Nikkormat etc......I'll advance order it tomorrow, hear that Nikon?
Now go make it!
Looks like WEX just got seven new orders :)
A sensible and considered article, but will it be appreciated amongst all the gear junkies?
AngryCorgi: Really wish Fuji would go back to bayer filters on their sensors. At the very least offer ONE interchangeable bayer option for its really sweet X system. The IQ of RAW files with this idiotic xtrans filter still is way behind bayer-filtered 16MP sensors. Cameralabs.com illustrates this very well with their X-M1 review and resolution results. The EP-5 and GF6 even blow it away in JPEG and RAW. Please, Fuji, see the light and bring us a "B" camera that uses your "X" mount!!
Looking at those results I think you are mistaking contrast for sharpness. There appears to be more fine detail in the Xe-1 files.
Ridiculous.........I think Fuji have already shown they can do this better at a not inconsiderable cost saving.
It is such a shame the Fuji split image system does not work the same as the old film way, I tried the Fuji at a show and found the split image implementation to be very messy as the image is out of focus until lined up (obviously as only sees through the lens). The whole point of the old split image was that you could see two pin sharp images moving into line as you focused so critical focus was easy as you lined up an edge in view, when the two "parts" are blurred its basically a bit of a naff split image system. I understand the only way to implement this is to use a real optical system, so why call it what it isn't?
Doesn't stop me wanting one of these beauties though, lovely little camera.
Marc Rogoff: This is not only a D600 problem but apparently the D800 has the same issue. In fact my D3X has terrible dust issues - very frustrating that Olympus seems to have solved the dust issue yet Nikon with all their R&D money cant sort this out...
Well I consider my studio to be pretty dusty being within an engineering building and I change the lenses on my D3X several times a day and am using apertures smaller than f32 virtually all the time, I have never seen a dust issue on mine, I guess your just unlucky.
Maybe somebody needs to do the exact same test but with the mirror locked up (I assume it can be locked?), at least the mirror mechanism could be eliminated as the cause if it still persists.