Am I reading this wrong or still no: "go to first unread post" link in a thread i posted in?
Hopefully search will be smarter to.
peevee1: The mirrorless field just got a lot more compatible, with NEX and NX filling the glaring holes in their lineups. m43 is still ahead with extra f/2.8 zooms and excellent tele primes still missing from other systems, but the prices for those are insane.
Yep, that mega slow and huge 2x zoom and odd 67mm f1.8 is really something others are missing.
Please don't tell them.
RStyga: HAHAHA... Somebody tell me, please, that I missed something: "No AF micro-adjust function". In the year 2012 a FF DSLR by the mighty pro manufacturer Nikon, priced at $2000+, has no AF micro-adjust function for its PDAF system. There must be a 'genius' marketing manager behind this mega-screw up. My poor K-r has micro AF adjustment. I hope Nikon will release an unlock F/W patch to correct things before this outrageously moronic decision hit the consumer base.
This is hilarious...
It's a serious fail.In my experience I almost always needed to set different values for close focus and lower light shooting on many of the primes.Zooms you learn to live with imperfections.
I don't see AF micro adjust?Its plain bad if it doesn't have it. PDAF sucks paired with many of the lenses.I often need to adjust for closer focus distances vs. rest.
Pat Cullinan Jr: "$599 for the optical viewfinder, $179 for the lens hood and $249 for the thumb grip"
That's a cool $1027.
These prices argue mental illness.
And by that pricing how much for the optional EVF?$1599!?!?
They left the most important information out.How many Mega Pixels?
Is it metal?
The things people are paid to develop these days...
Why the need to explain?Its insured. If I dropped it is covered. If I get annoyed by the bad photos and stomp it myself it should also be covered... :-P
Nice addition to the stable.Keeps Leica in the "special" camera maker league.
Whats the big deal?So if one takes a photo of a homeless person and wins, or worse of a girl whose relatives were just blown away by a suicide bomber wins a Pulitzer, than its art?
But a candid shot of a fat person is only mockery?
Funny thing is, the author didn't make a mocking caption... it was you guys who are mocking her at first thought and sight of this image and then acting self-righteous and trolling in the comments...
The truth is... this author was in more danger than the guy who won the Pulitzer for the awful war picture. ! hahahaha!Enjoy life!
This was waste of resources... And people who did the programing know it.I hope DPReview has put in a request for resources for a complete site overhaul to bringbit into sync with the rest of the internet.
It is embarrising that the only effective way to search this site is to go on Google and type: dpreview "thing you want to find"
Kosta Sobevski: Was there saran wrap put over the lenses that these pictures were shot with? It looks like there's no focus point in some of these as well. I don't know if I'd call these "real world samples" of the D800.
I would call them exactly that¨...Do you expect 36MP sharpness viewed at 100% shot handheld using a non stabilised prime with this cam? LOL!
Yeah, maybe at 50mm 1%500 f,56 and sunlight...
Is this speed a joke!?
Thank you, but no thank you.I need a vacation just from reading that job description. :-P
Will offer a support program for the victims of their heartless pricing...
That's the way it should say...
Why would we assume 4 dots per pixel, what is this madness?And 5:4 ratio means its effective resolution is smaller when viewing real photos.
Another thing that is quietly ignored is how big will manufacturers make this thing appear in the viewfinder. No point in high res if it appears as a 40" TV viewed from 3m distance.There is a limit to a pixel size that eye can see at a certain "distance"1080p on a 32" screens has a usable limit of 90cm to 1m, beyond that you mind as well have an ordinary 720p screen...
And this is front page news because...?What? I don't get it... Is this a girlfriend from one of the staff?
By this any forum rand will be up here. Look there are at least 20 active on this board at any given moment...
LOL thats the way to save a company! Even the TV services are playing the rumor game. :-)
Wow that was wonderful... and complicated. For this kinda stuff I hate Photoshop.I know professionals love professional tools cause they like more control, but when they start using them only cause it makes them look smart and more competent is when their attitudes become snobby.
I personally would use Photoshop to remove blemishes and an automatic retoucher like Portrait professional, to simplify my life.
But I am not a professional... :-)