Doug Frost

The house will always belong to a human. Monkeys don't have property rights.

@Lawn Lends - Conceiving, planning, and having the equipment to build a house makes the house yours, just as taking the analogous steps to produce a photograph makes the photograph yours. You could give a pen to a baboon and have him scribble on your deed and it would not affect your ownership of the house.

The photo wouldn't exist without Slater's concept, planning and equipment. It doesn't matter that he didn't actually press the shutter release. It's every bit as much his photograph as if he did.

It's missing some very basic features, such as dodging and burning brushes. It was interesting to play with, but it's merely a passing curiosity at this stage.

It's Hollywood telling a story, not an infomercial, for god's sake. If we were to cull every movie that misrepresented technology for the sake of dramatic effect there would be precious few remaining. Entire franchises would be wiped out, from 007 to Star Wars to every superhero movie ever made. I think we can manage to suspend disbelief enough to allow for a supernatural Polaroid camera in a horror film without getting our panties in a twist. Get over it.

There's an even bigger deterrent than equipment cost for pro Canon shooters thinking of switching to Sony: support. Sony's pro support lags far behind Canon's. Canon has 24/7 phone support, 2-day service turnaround, loaners provided during service, plus on-site support at many shows and events. Sony's pro support can't touch that. It is cheaper than Canon's plan, however--$100/year vs. $200/year. But for working pros Canon's superior support is well worth the extra 100 bucks for peace of mind.

I bought an X100 early on and found it really frustrating to use with the 1.0 firmware. Even after a couple of updates I still found the camera too quirky to use comfortably. I really loved the IQ, but that wasn't enough. So it wound up sitting in an old camera bag in my closet for over a year. Then about 3 years ago I dug it out of the closet, applied the latest firmware update and re-read the manual. I was amazed. The X100 had become easier to use. I started shooting with it again, taking it with me everywhere. I fell in love with its macro capability and started taking photos of vegetables at my local farmers market. Today it's my go-to when I just want to grab a compact camera to take along with me. And although it's 7-year old CMOS sensor is dated in terms of high ISO performance and resolution, it still kicks the X-Trans's ass in overall image quality. In a world where most digital cameras become obsolete after a couple of years, my trusty old X100 still delivers.

The gallery loaded just fine for me. Probably the issue is on your end, not with amazon.

The shots look very good. There's not much in the way of bokeh happening here, which is to be expected with a 1" sensor. But otherwise, sharpness, contrast, color and dynamic range look good and noise appears well controlled.

This is nothing special. Even my smartphone has a self-powered video camera in it. I can record and play back videos without connecting it to an external power supply. Plus it has internal power for the phone and a bunch of other stuff, too. Imagine that!

If you're buying a Leica for the name then you don't care about the photograph and therefore how it makes the photograph means even less to you. If you care about the photograph but think there are cheaper cameras that do just as good a job, then how the Leica T does what it does is irrelevant. In both cases, you should still STFU and simply use whatever camera does the job for you.

What's pathetic is anyone caring how Leica achieves the final image. The photograph is the only thing that matters. I don't care if Leica is using hardware, software or magic crystals to generate a photograph. The only question anyone needs to ask themselves is, "do I like what this camera does?" If the answer is "yes", then that's great, maybe it's a good camera for you. If the answer is "no", then don't buy it, move on and STFU. It doesn't matter.

I'm buying one... just as soon as I win the lottery!

It's true that Adobe isn't in business to make me happy. But then, I'm not in the habit of doing business with companies that make me unhappy.

No E-Mount camera has ever had in-body stabilization.

It was never more than a gimmick. Interesting, but not particularly useful for anything beyond being able to impress your friends with it for about 5 minutes.

That kid is f*cking awesome.

This does nothing to lessen my hostility to Creative Cloud. Despite Adobe's assurances, CC is nothing more than Adobe leveraging their near-monopoly in professional graphics applications to force people into paying them a monthly fee rather than allowing them to purchase a license and potentially wait to upgrade until there's a version they find useful, even if it's a few generations later. I hope their strategy fails, big time.

Real photography? Are we to believe that only photojournalism and editorial photographs constitute "real photography"? I don't think so. Yes, Brodie's photographs are great, but be careful not to denigrate other forms of photographic art in comparison. Don't be so quick to dismiss peoples' work that doesn't fit into your narrow definition of artistic legitimacy. And for god's sake DON'T learn to photograph like Mike Brodie! Develop YOUR OWN style and YOUR OWN vision! Don't listen to anyone who tries to tell you how you "should" photograph.

Lewkowicz's work hasn't told us anything we didn't already know about domestic violence. Nothing at all. It's not like it wasn't a crime and people weren't locked up for it before she came along. She hasn't revealed any deeper understanding of its causes, either. Her work has made no difference whatsoever. In fact, she failed to make a difference the one time she had a real opportunity to do so. She should not have simply stood by and taken pictures while it happened.