.i tried this piece of sh*t about 2 years ago. the first time i put it a few centimeters under the water surface it flooded. wtf???
.with all due respect anyone standing there with a dslr camera at his face for the duration of the game would have taken identical shots. pro means merely that they make living with it, not that its actually good. taxi drivers are also pros, arent they? yet i dont think anyone would claim that they drive better than a person who does not make a living driving a car. same thing with photography. so pls get over the defiled 'pro' abreviation.
i bet the radio station was thinking the photo was so mediocre nobody would want money for them using it. if they wanted to intentionally infringe they would have gone with a much better quality shot that google's is full of..the aggressive, hysterical chick that took the shot needs to cool down. copyright laws in most countries are absurd, and their violation is often far from immoral. that's a fact. if you're so protective of your photos that something like this makes you go berserk, then don't freakin publish them for the world to see. and use. that's right, you put it out there, it's for grabs. the law may not say so, but the common sense does.
this is a fantastic shot, lighting is top notch, composition-wise it reminds me of old french paintings.
haha, waterproof, yeah right. my WG1 didn't survive a 3 foot deep kiddie pool. when i saw that battery/card cover i though it would be a miracle if it did.
Jimmy jang Boo: Nice! This is a great improvement and it is much appreciated.
As for those who are so concerned about their images being downloaded, if they want to use your website to promote and protect their business interests, they should pay for special privileges. And in addition to that, if they actually sell anything, charge them a royalty.
@xtophlook buddy, wouldn't it be so much safer to keep your photos to yourself? just keep it on your local hard drive, don't show it to anyone, not even your mother, and you're guaranteed the sole and exclusive appropriation of your photograph. what do you say?
calm down roel, copyright is a made up concept, it is nonparallel with ethics or morality, and your autoshow analogy only demonstrates how ridiculous the whole thinking is. if you insist on using the autoshow as an example, then enforcement of copyright is like telling people they can't tell anyone what they saw.
There will be several mid to top level management suicides in japan this weekend. and for what? so that someone can obsess over some atomic level imperfections?
was it worth it? was it?
what is with all these postage stamp-sized photos? this is utterly ridiculous. the story is pointless if i can't see the photos it relates to. i even stopped reading it once i discovered the miniature pictures are not clickable.
if this guy, whatever his name is, won't let you LOOK AT his photos unless you pay him 60 to 1440 pounds than this not a guy whose pictures i want to look at.
what the hell happened to good old showing of photographs to other people? for free?
i'm surprised the stamps above aren't covered in watermarks. or maybe they are, they're just so tiny you can't even see them. ridiculous.
MoltenP: Awesome...what would make it more awesome is if you can put an SD card from another camera in it and print its pictures. Then you'd have a little portable printer to make prints from.
Cost per print is ~50 cents, which is a bit high. Hopefully it can come down. The prints have sticky backs, so expect to see some slap happy people decorating telephone poles with their 2x3" prints. :)
what country do you live in that you have actual telephone poles? arent landlines called landlines because theyre burried?
Esoz: This is the perfect camera for my 5 yro daughter. She's been wanting a camera for so long but current cameras are either too awkward to use for her small fingers or too expensive. Not to mention the non-instant nature of digital cameras where you have to connect the card to a PC, setup the printer, fire up the software, and go through the multi-page menus to choose the print command, all of which would be quite daunting for a 5 year old without any adult help. With this Polaroid (assuming it is small enough and easy to use) you only need to snap the picture and print it straight away. My daughter will love it!
what a shill. ludacrous. lol. you suck at this, yure supposed to be inconspicuous, instead you sound like a dumb informercial. joke of the day.
barri: seems like a rather useless product to me.
thats what i say about sliced bread today. its gross, dried out sponge. bread isi meant to be sliced before consumation. your grampa was right.
NiallM: My next compact will probably be the XZ-1 but my options are still open so naturally i tend to use it in the comparison tool...once again it destroys the competition in the center, the corners, tones, etc..
SX260 HS conclusion: Not bad. Next please...
being just a casual visitor i didn't know right away what camera you're speaking of. having checked it in the JPEG comparison i must say WTF!?!? that camera rocks, everything else just looks like it has sunscreen spread across the lens. i'm genuinely stunned, especially as a new owner of S100.
too bad it isn't just a little smaller.
yes i am certain the 'non-professional image makers' will be mad as hell because of that 19MP limit. it essentially renders the whole app useless.
Each page of the review ends with "Buy the Sony SLT-A37 from Amazon" banner. If I am not mistaken, Amazon also owns this website.
My question is how can it be taken seriously? I mean really?