File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
LOL SUP GUIZE


WHATS GOIN ON IN THIS THREAD
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
ZOMG MEGAPINCHERS
>> 24.6 MILLION OH MY GOD Anonymous
BEST SLR IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND SO FAR
>> Anonymous
>>248122
>>248121


canon fags
>> Anonymous
I predict a price of OVER FIVE THOUSANDDDD
>> Anonymous
See... I have 2 problems with this

1: It really is just a giant penis extender.
2: It's a Sony - Where's the passion? Where's the rich history of camera-making and lens design?
>> Anonymous
In b4 Butterfly
>> Anonymous
InB4 Butterfly fapping
>> Anonymous
>>248120"The 'a' logo is pronounced as 'Alpha'."
Seriously? Is the target audience THAT stupid?
>> Project !dashI8UpO.
>>248145
1. Just like what everyone is trying to do in the megapixel race.
2. It might be with Minolta but I'd say ask the same question to Canikon, Olympax and all the other manufacturers who pay more attention to amateur consumers rather than photographers. Nikon has how many 18-whatevers and marketing gimmicks, Canon is still running the megapixel race on the lower end far longer than needed, Olympus is going it's SMALL so forget performance, and Pentax is fuck if I know.

Digital photography is less than 20 years old and the technology seems to be plateauing pointlessly at the moment. Lenses I can forgive since they're future proof. Megapuxels DURR HURR, marketers wet dream indeed. I want my high dynamic range, high ISO performance, 6mp sensor.

Soon, companies will see themselves in the same problem Intel is in now. They're still trying to dig themselves out of the More GHZ = BETTAR strategy thanks to how the C2D 1.8Ghz outperforms a P4 at 3.6Ghz and replacing it with the More Cores = AWESAM even though it isn't the case for most applications and dual is good on its own.
>> Anonymous
>>248145
>It's a Sony - Where's the passion? Where's the rich history of camera-making and lens design?

Sony bought it's passion and history from Minolta.
>> Anonymous
>>248152
fuck yeah dual sensors!
>> Anonymous
if its not full frame, it's fail.
>> Anonymous
24 MEGAPIXERS OF JUICE
>> Anonymous
>>248152
>Where's the passion? Where's the rich history of camera-making and lens design?
>Nikon has how many 18-whatevers and marketing gimmicks
These 18-whatevers and gimmicks, on the other hand, allow them to spend money on R&D for stuff like the 14-24/2.8 and continue production of some MF lenses for purists. Oh, and it's still better than whoring their rich history of camera-making like some other manufacturers do (*cough* Leica *cough*)

>Canon is still running the megapixel race on the lower end far longer than needed
Lolwut? Their sensors are still pretty clean on most-used sensitivities. It's far from the catastrophe seen on newest compacts which have excessive NR even at ISO 80.

>Olympus is going it's SMALL so forget performance,
Lolwut*2? Olympus' sensors may fail @ noise, but they have awesome lenses and some of the most influential ideas on the market.

>Pentax is fuck if I know.
Uh, Limited lens series, anyone?
>> free gallery and DVD all virgins girls
http://board3.cgiworld.dreamwiz.com/list.cgi?id=pornty
>> Anonymous
Canon had really better get off their ass and upgrade the 5D if they want to stay anything like in the market. The D700 is already significantly better camera, and the a900 is going to kill with the gearfags.

Incidentally, WHY DO SO MANY PEOPLE BUY SONY SLRs? I think I now see more Sony SLRs than I do Nikon, and they just entered the market (Canon Rebel series are still the most common by far). Is it just because of hipsters and rich kids deciding they need a DSLR and only recognizing the Sony name? Or the constant Live View?
>> Anonymous
>>248152I want my high dynamic range, high ISO performance, 6mp sensor.

You and me both. The 12MP FX sensors from Nikon are almost the same pixel density as their 6MP sensors. Just having D700 noise levels on a D50ish DX body would be fucking fantastic.
>> Anonymous
>>248166WHY DO SO MANY PEOPLE BUY SONY SLRs?
>>BUY SONY SLRs?
>>SONY?

What's the name on the front of those cameras, again?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>248152
Oh ai

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 MacintoshImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:07:01 12:43:23Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width450Image Height381
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
rofl@
>The "a" logo is pronounced Alpha you fags

Also, DO WANT.

Also in during Butterfly.
>> Anonymous
>>248166Incidentally, WHY DO SO MANY PEOPLE BUY SONY SLRs? I think I now see more Sony SLRs than I do Nikon, and they just entered the market (Canon Rebel series are still the most common by far). Is it just because of hipsters and rich kids deciding they need a DSLR and only recognizing the Sony name? Or the constant Live View?

I got mine because I have some old Minolta Rokkor lenses, and the a200 is actually very competitively priced. Now I just need a mount adapter...
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>248184
>I got mine because I have some old Minolta Rokkor lenses
>Now I just need a mount adapter...

I've got some bad news for you, those adapters have lenses that spoil the image quality. Should've gotten an Olympus, lol.
>> Anonymous
>>248184

Okay, but I have old Pentax lenses, and I didn't buy a Pentax DSLR. I bought a Canon. And unless Pentax comes out with a full-frame camera in the next 3-6 months, my next DSLR will be a Canon as well.
>> Anonymous
>>248186
...Sonuvabitch.

Whatever. It's still a good camera. I just hope there are some good Tamron lenses or something.
>> Anonymous
>>248188


i got mine cause i had an old x700 with some kick ass lenses and trusted the minolta name, especially since sony picked it up.


i haven't been disappointed yet.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
if anyones interested i bought a sony cause of the 88-CV.
>> Anonymous
>>248188

>It's still a good camera

you just keep telling yourself that, denialfag. enjoy your noise at ISO200.
>> Anonymous
icame
>> Anonymous
>>248193
what's a 88-CV? Is that a vintage Citroen car?
>> Anonymous
>>248194

THEY SEE ME TROLLIN
>> Anonymous
>>248228
No, it's a new racecar sponsored by minolta IIRC. Maybe now it's sponsored by sony too.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
     File :-(, x)
>>248243
'new' for 1988 prehaps, its an old LM racer.
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
>>248598
Isn't that one of the ones you can fly in on Granturismo 3? I know you can in the 787B.
>> Anonymous
lol canon.
>> Anonymous
>>248161

It is, idiot.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>248152
>I want my high dynamic range, high ISO performance, 6mp sensor.

they already have. shhhh. don't tell anyone
>> Anonymous
>>249530
S5 pro now!
>> Anonymous
>>249530
Yeah, but with the processing improvements of the last few years? I don't think so, Tim.
>> Project !dashI8UpO.
>>249530
Yeah, I was thinking if anyone's going take a gamble on it, it would be Fujifilm. I want my S6 in a D300 body NAO!
>> Anonymous
And here it comes Nikon with the new 1 Giga Pixel
>> Anonymous
>>248164

>Lolwut*2? Olympus' sensors may fail @ noise, but they have awesome lenses and some of the most influential ideas on the market.


And the noise thing is waaay overblown. Olympus sensors are marginally more noisy at higher ISOs than other brands, and with the noise reduction algorithms available now it's not even an issue save for a few circumstances. But I agree with you about the lens line; Zuiko lenses are sweeeet.
>> Anonymous
what a weird set of specs.
24 megapixels, five frames a second, but no live view and a 0.74x magnification viewfinder? 9 points of autofocus? weird.
>> Anonymous
>>249597
>0.74x magnification viewfinder
What's weird about that? D3 and 1Ds Mk. II both have .7, 5D has .71, D700 has .72, 1Ds Mk. III has .76 and I'm not looking the rest up. That's typical for a 36x24mm format DSLR.
>> Anonymous
>>249616

9 autofocus points for a pro camera is garbage though
>> Anonymous
>>249616
ah really? that's my noobness coming through, i thought the higher spec stuff was closer to 1x magnification.
>> Anonymous !EOS5DJQoBA
>>249647
You're thinking 100% coverage, not 1x magnification.
>> Anonymous
>>249625
The E3 has 11, but they're supposedly really fast. I guess it depends on your subject or shooting style if quicker or more is what you need.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
Oh, hey. I just noticed that this isn't actually a magazine. Looks like pre-print galley proofs. Explains why there's ad copy for it when there hasn't been an official announcement as of yet.
>> Anonymous
>>249625


rumor is those are just user selectable and that there are more.
>> Anonymous
Nikon D200 > Every single camera out there.
>> Anonymous
related:

[
"Some of the more expensive dSLRs like the Canon 1DSMKIII etc have f/4 and even f/5.6 sensitive AF sensors, which makes them fast and accurate even with a much slower (max aperture) lens"

reply- "I dont think you've said that right. I understand the specs to be:

45-point TTL
• 19 cross-type points, require F2.8 or faster lens *
• Center cross-type point requires F4.0 or faster lens
• 26 assist points, require F5.6 or faster lens *

So with a 2.8 or faster its great, all 45 points engaged, 19 crosses.

With an f4 - one cross, 18 crosses become lines, and the assist points work. Damn and $8000 camera with a $6000 400 F4 DO lens and I get 1 cross sensor?

With a 5.6 - no crosses, 19 lines and 26 assists

5.6 plus - no crosses, 19 lines, no assists. So by the time you've got out here your AF system isnt that far ahead of the 11 point A700.
"
]


Also, a little touted "feature" of an f/2.8 and faster lens is that some of the AF points are f/2.8 sensitive, and makes them lock focus, much faster and more accurately, when a lens with a maximum aperture of f/2.8 (or larger), is mounted.

Note that the f/2.8 sensitive AF sensors are active, even if a lens with a *max* aperture of f/2.8 (or larger) is stopped down to f/4 or f/8 or whatever and obviously is a plus in ALL lighting conditions.
>> Anonymous
>>249651
For me, 11 points on my E-3 are more than enough - I could probably live with 9 just as easily, provided they're distributed across the frame in a non-retarded way. The A900 is definitely not a camera for shooting sports, so a super-complex AF system would've just bumped up the price and made it look better in comparison sheets, not in most real-life shooting conditions.
>> Anonymous
Who wants to bet some magazine writer is going to call this the "Beast of Exmor?"