On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 20:50:24 -0500, hk wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:53:32 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:53:19 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 14:20:19 -0500, Boater
wrote:

About $8000 for the body only. (Yikes)

24,5 Megapixel in FX-Format
3D Color Matrix II, Center-Weighted and Spot Metering
1 - 7 fps
1/8000 to 30 seconds shutter
ISO equivalency 100 to 1,600
2 lb 11 oz / 1220 g
Price est. $7,995 USD body

Another FX-format camera means that Nikon will jump back with both
feet into the production of full-frame lenses, updating some of the
current ones and introducing new ones.
Ain't gonna matter. 4/3rds is going to rule the world.
Will that be at the same time or just after eTech Evinrudes "capture"
a larger market share than Yamaha four-strokes? :)
Same theory actually - the better things are fewer in number.

It's an age old axiom that consumer sheeple like you get suckered with
every day.
What are the advantages of the 4/3rd system vs Canon or Nikon?
Well, it has a smaller sensor than the DX cameras!

Oh...wait...that's not an advantage.

Not true at all - it's a full frame system - it's just at a 4:3 rds
aspect ratio which is a fairly common standard for high quality film
work because of it's anamorphic qualities.

I think it was called Super35 or something like that.

Argue with this wiki article and diagram:

The name of the system comes from the size type of the image sensor used
in the cameras. The image sensor is commonly referred to as a 4/3" type
or 4/3 type sensor. The common inch-based sizing system is derived from
vacuum image-sensing video camera tubes, which are now obsolete. The
imaging area of a Four-Thirds sensor is equal to that of a video camera
tube of 4/3" diameter.

The size of the sensor is 18×13.5 mm (22.5 mm diagonal), with an imaging
area of 17.3×13.0 mm (21.6 mm diagonal).[2] Its area is 30–40% less than
the APS-C sensors used in most other DSLRs, but around 9 times larger
than the 1/2.5" sensors typically used in compact digital cameras (see
image sensor format).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SensorSizes.png

Note the sentence: "Its area is 30–40% less than the APS-C sensors used
in most other DSLRs, "

Yes - It's smaller - I never said it wasn't.

IT'S DESIGNED THAT WAY ON PURPOSE TO ACHIEVE FULL FRAME IMAGES AT
SHORTER FOCAL LENGTHS AND AT BETTER QUALITY BECAUSE THE LENSES AND
SENSOR ARE DESIGNED AS A COMPLETE DIGITAL SYSTEM UNLIKE OTHER SYSTEMS
WHICH ARE TRYING TO EMULATE 35 MM SLRS.

Honest to pete Harry - wake the **** up.