Will Nikon continue to market the D600? Or have any unsold units been recalled?
Are any of the D610 units "factory refurbished" D600s with a degreased sensor and replacement shutter mechanism?
D600 owners (many of whom insisted there was no problem, or that it hardly mattered) will of course, as a matter of high principle, desist from any plea to swap their units. Ahem... Yes, quite.
psn: 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...
The USPS has dedicated many, many stamps to monuments, landmarks, and well-known pieces of public art over the years. If it rolls over on this case, opportunists everywhere will go on a roll. Attorneys will awaken the dead, if need be, to recruit plaintifs. The US will simply have to cease using stamp illustrations where the risks exist. Henceforth, nothing but neutered stamps with a zebra code that confirms postage.
TTMartin: I think the US Govt should be charging the sculptor for using Federal Lands the memorial is on to conduct a commercial business.
All told, the USPS does not really "make money" on stamps or mail delivery in general. The conmemorative stamp gave Gaylord a "free ride" publicity-wise for his work and should pay a fee.
Jim Radcliffe: Silly lawsuit. Every tourist that photographs that sculpture is also violating his copyright.. might as well sue them as well. Seriously, he's just greedy and looking for easy money.
The USPS is a pretty huge, soft target. Gaylord's advistor knew by heart the counsel of Willie Sutton: "that's where the money is." However, given the employee pension plan deficit, the difference will have to come from higher fees, taxes, or cutbacks. Untill recently, every US penny had an image of the Lincoln Memorial, with an itty-bitty image of Daniel Chester French's sculpture of the president grieving over the Civil War. French's descendents might have a stronger case that someone was "making money" from the work without paying additional royalty. Moolah!
vroger1: I bought each of the G series- trading in each one for 50% of the cost of a new one- and stopped at the G12. In the interim I bought the G1X for the larger sensor. My problem with all of the series was solved with the new lens on the G15 (which I did not buy). f2.8 reducing to 5.6 or whatever when the lens is extended, is too slow. The other item is the v/f. I shoot only through a v/f and it is difficult with these cameras. We need an EVF. Don't ask me why, but when the price dropped like a stone, I bought the EOS M for the sensor size. I can only use it with one lens and an OVF. I have been waiting for a G1X withe a faster lens. I will give up on the V/F if they will produce one. The lenses and quality are wonderful.
Do you keep the entire "G harem" in the same stable? Doesn't one get jealous if you pick another for an outing? But it must be quite a show to carry them all about at once.
obscura64: Whenever people ask me advice about buying a camera I always recommend this site first. It has great reviews on the equipment to make great images. However in reading the posts here I have to say that it has a lot of very narrow minded people. With some I might even go so far as to say "visually illiterate". I'm not saying that you have to like this artists work but dismissiveness is not critical thinking. When I look at the work I see much that is visually compelling but better yet I see work that makes me think and want to go deeper into the images. Unfortunately most of what you will find here or most of the web is a discussion of megapixels.
Camera-fans include an unusual quotient of "idiot savants" obsessed with very narrow things, who to ape if confronted with different subjects, or anything alive or ambiguous like art.
Roland Schulz: Reviews are coming down here: The new test scene is not where it should be. I still have both cameras and tested for DR and noise. MKII is definitely better in DR (especially using ACR), here they found the opposite. ISO sensitivity is not accurate since RX100 ISO125 is as ISO160 on RX100II, so one must be wrong. Why are there no noise tests below ISO160? ISO100 is definitely better on the MKII than native ISO160, but I see only a whiny tiny bit of loss in DR, so I always use ISO100 as long as light allows that. The lens seems decentered from the test sample here. Ok, my first RX100 was decentered, too.For me the MKII is about one stop better in the end, about half a stop in noise and half a stop in DR. So for me the MKII is an improvement. Lens could get somewhat better, but in the end for me the very best camera in that size and somewhat about, large headroom for PP. More than worth the price for me...
$1,400 spent on two pocket cameras. MII for the right pocket, MI for the left. Oder Linkshänder?
RX100 II @ $500 = Gold.RX100 II @ $750 = Silver (or iron pyrite).
Fan: "You cannot put a price on quality," then keels over coughing.
Me: $750 > D3100 + 2-lenses, J1 or V1, G5, NEX6, T4i, or 2.5x LX7.
M DeNero: Another niche model from Sony that is too expensive to generate strong sales and will contribute to Sony's financial problems. They have too many niche products.
If Sony offered only the RX100 II, one NEX model, and maybe the A77, and exited the P&S market, it might make money. Instead, it makes redundant models that exceed the (inelastic) demand for "Sony" brand. But executives are graded by the count of products, plants, and people they control, the same way Navy admirals are ranked by deadweight tonnage and obsolete measures of firepower, rather than diesel consumption or vessels' survival in real combat. So the company will follow the same course as the doomed Yamato.
andywhoa: I feel like this camera received a silver award because so many people have been complaining about how many gold awards are being thrown out.
Top camera and "virtually untouchable" in it's class? SILVER AWARD!
Reason: too expensive. Priced at $500, it would be a "gold."
bert01: I think dpreview is being a troll on it's own review just to create controversy. Giving the RX100 the Silver award for being the best in its class makes a mockery of their rating system.
Priced a bit lower, it would merit a "gold." Price does matter, especially considering the short functional an economic life of any pocket camera that actually gets heavy use.
DaveCS: Maybe it's me but the title of the DPReview post:NYT offers a look 'hometown' across the U.S. through the eyes of teens
Makes absolutely no sense. It needs, at the very least, an "at" nestled in there between "look" and " 'hometown' ". Sorry but while the photos are great title read not well when missing word thing (catch the drift?).
If you get no further than that, too bad.
You can "look there" and understand, without being told "look at there" or "look over there." Army drill sergeants bark "Eyes right!"
Johnsonj: Kids aren't bogged down by per-conceived notions about what photography should be. They're more pure and less concerned about convention, rules, Photoshop and the diminishing returns of the RAW file. Give some willing kids a 5 minutes lesson on using a P&S camera and let them loose for a photo essay about Anytown, USA and they'll come back with images equal to (or better) than any seasoned photo journalist.
The editors probably did some selection of the thousands or millions of submissions. Otherwise, most of the pictures would have been pretty much what most teens (or anyone else) posts to Facebook: friends, pets, etc. There might also be some "Holden Caldwell" out there whose photos might be striking but "in your face" too.
TomCreek: I'm guessing she's from back east, NY, Vermont maybe...no self-respecting Montana native would have time to produce this self-absored drivel.
Albus was born in Billings and has lived in MT more or less continuously for 25 years.
The Blackfoot, Cheyenne, Flathead, Crow, and other native Montana residents probably don't object to her work, either.
fad: As an old fashioned guy, I don't get all the criticism. She's worked very hard, and some of the images are very good.
Now, I do think she just doesn't have quite enough artistic imagination to realize the full potential of her conceit. But how many people do? I would have liked to see more meditation on how a dress is not just an object, but something that echoes and once joined with a human body. I would like to see a meditation on how time affects both the landscape and the body, decays both, and endues both with a terrifying beauty.
But artists of that caliber are not on dpr's radar, and would not communicate to us gearheads.
Van Gogh was obsessed with yellows and worn-out clothes, shoes, and ragged people. The world reviled or was indifferent. All were, and remain, naive. Established tastes evolve, and we are its minions.
BTW: "conceit" and "concept" have the same etymological roots. In Portuguese, conceito is the only word. Art (and just about everything else) require conceit and concept.
Keith Reeder: Contrived, pretentious drivel.
CPD? In a word: art. What variety of CPD sends a tickle through your scruff?
dccdp: It's always disturbing to see other people's fetishes.
Yes. People obsessed with big cameras, hefty lenses, or how pictures look at pixel level have a strange mental life. The only mirrors they can bear are the ones locked inside a DSLR.
(unknown member): I think this is clumsy and pretentious nonsense.
At least Dali was clever, creative, thought-provoking, and humorous.
ObPhotoContent: the "Dali Atomicus" photo by Phillipe Halsman, representing an extreme macro interpretation of atomic particles in suspension. No Photoshop or LR, just water, cats, string, and 28 attempts.
Dali: rotting corpses, coprophilia, transgender messiahs, mutiliation. Plus egregious commercial aplomb. All a matter of taste. Take your pick.
ppronovo: Despite being fond of Nikon products, this seems too little too late. I don't see what is superior in this to other options out there. I would never take this diving if it can only be used to 15 m. I know scuba diving isn't all of underwater use, but 49 ft seems limited. What am I missing?
Dives more than 49 feet are no good for photography, unless one brings lamps to compensate for loss of red wavelengths and darkness. Otherwise, everything looks blue-gray, gloomy, and murky. Air tanks last less time at greater depths, and you incur risk of bends or rapture of the deep. No fun. Not much to see. Not worth the trouble. Stuff for ALVIN, not me.
Nuno Souto: Have any of the reviewers of these "underwater" cameras actually tried to change a setting while underwater? It's virtually impossible to read anything on a lcd screen while diving. That goes for just about all the "underwater" cameras I've tried so far. And of course, I've tried them underwater. Not in a hotel room...
Dive mask won't make the LCD readable if the sun is to your back. Swimming upside down won't help much, either, especially if your snorkel floods or scuba bubbles block your view. Beneath a certain depth, pressure causes some control buttons to collapse or cease to function.