Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
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.


Oh, of course. I should buy into the PR.

Next time I attend an event in DC at which a zillion press photographers
are present, I'll count up all the 4/3'rds cameras, and see how that
number stacks up against the Nikons and Canons. The professional
photogs, of course, are not using the 4/3'rds cameras because they have
no interest in better quality.

I get it. But Nikon and Canon don't.

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
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!

I really have no idea what the 4/3rd group is selling as their
advantages, but I had it was a way for those with smaller market share
to be able to group together to allow them to compete against Nikon and
Canon.


There's a good if lengthy rundown on DP Review:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse3/page35.asp is the
conclusion page.


Interestingly, the camera is the same size as the Nikon d300

Olympus 5.6" x 4.6" x 2.9 " 1.9 pounds
Nikon 5.8 4.5 2.9 2 pounds

I'm sure it is a fine camera. Olympus knows how to build cameras. The
advantages of Four-Thirds format in semi-pro cameras remain to be seen.

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

On Dec 1, 7:15*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports

Well, the obvious is because I own it and we all know that I am one to
emulate being the manly handsome dude that I am.

Who? YOU?



In short, advanced technolog - something not everybody appreciates.


Who? ME?

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

On Dec 1, 8:03*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports


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


"cough* i haven't heard that term since about 1981

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:30:29 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

On Dec 1, 7:15*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports

Well, the obvious is because I own it and we all know that I am one to
emulate being the manly handsome dude that I am.

Who? YOU?

Of course me - who else?

In short, advanced technology - something not everybody appreciates.

Who? ME?

If the shoe fits...

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

On Dec 1, 9:52*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:30:29 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

On Dec 1, 7:15*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports

Well, the obvious is because I own it and we all know that I am one to
emulate being the manly handsome dude that I am.

Who? YOU?

Of course me - who else?

In short, advanced technology - something not everybody appreciates.

Who? *ME?

If the shoe fits...

14's?

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 20:25:18 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

On Dec 1, 9:52*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:30:29 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

On Dec 1, 7:15*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports

Well, the obvious is because I own it and we all know that I am one to
emulate being the manly handsome dude that I am.

Who? YOU?

Of course me - who else?

In short, advanced technology - something not everybody appreciates.

Who? *ME?

If the shoe fits...

14's?

14? What - you Shaquille O'Neal?

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

On Dec 2, 4:30*am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 20:25:18 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:



On Dec 1, 9:52*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:30:29 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

On Dec 1, 7:15*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports

Well, the obvious is because I own it and we all know that I am one to
emulate being the manly handsome dude that I am.

Who? YOU?

Of course me - who else?

In short, advanced technology - something not everybody appreciates..

Who? *ME?

If the shoe fits...

14's?

14? *What - you Shaquille O'Neal?

No, I just stand firm.

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

Boater wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
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!

I really have no idea what the 4/3rd group is selling as their
advantages, but I had it was a way for those with smaller market share
to be able to group together to allow them to compete against Nikon
and Canon.


There's a good if lengthy rundown on DP Review:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse3/page35.asp is the
conclusion page.


Interestingly, the camera is the same size as the Nikon d300

Olympus 5.6" x 4.6" x 2.9 " 1.9 pounds
Nikon 5.8 4.5 2.9 2 pounds

I'm sure it is a fine camera. Olympus knows how to build cameras. The
advantages of Four-Thirds format in semi-pro cameras remain to be seen.

That seemed to be a fairly objective review (very unusual for most mags
and web sites selling ads) and highlighted the pros and cons I have read
elsewhere.

For what it is worth, for a number of years, Nikon definitely trailed
behind Canon in both high end and point and shot digital cameras. It
was not until recently that they seemed to be the leader/innovator in
DSLR, including the prosumer and pro cameras. My guess is the state of
the art and the best in category camera will jump back and forth between
Canon and Nikon and neither will remain the top dog long enough enough
to get anyone to sell all of their glass to change brands. Today, it
looks like Nikon's aggressive design improvements has pushed it ahead of
Canon in the consumer and prosumer DSLR market.

As far as the consumer P&S market. in 2007 Nikon lagged behind Canon,
Sony, Kodak, Samsung and Olympus in that order. It wasn't till 2008
that Nikon really started to come up with competitive P&S cameras and
expanded it's line of low end DSLR. Coupled with an aggressive
marketing campaign, it will be interesting to see what that does to the
overall market share for digital cameras. I would be willing to bet
that Nikon exceeds Canon sales for the first time in a number of years.

From reading about the 4/3's system, it definitely has many advantages
and are used by some professionals whose needs are meet by the current
lens offered by Olympus. If you are a looking for a prosumer camera,
and have a large investment in Olympus glass, most amateurs would have a
hard time changing systems, especially if they prefer shooting in jpg vs
RAW and are not regularly shooting in low light, where Canon and Nikon
have the advantage.

Since it really isn't the camera or the glass that takes the photograph,
a first class award winning photograph can be taken with any camera,
including a hand made pin hole camera. Normally you only see passionate
arguments between Canon and Nikon users, so it is is nice to see someone
being passionate about Olympus. If you look at B&H enduser reviews,
they love the E-3.

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 07:09:50 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

If you look at B&H enduser reviews, they love the E-3.

I'll know today - the E-3 is on it's way and it out for delivery.

Whoo hoo!!

I spent a lot of time thining about the E-3 vs the Nikon D2X to tell
the truth. And your point about Oly glass is an important one, but I
was willing to over look that based strictly on the work that you and
Russ, as relatively raw amateurs, were doing with your cameras. I have
been truly impressed with Russ's work and yours.

It really came down to the fact that I've done some pretty good stuff
myself although my focus is on abstract and impressionist style rather
than strictly representational imagery. With all the glass I
currently own in both Zuiko 4/3rds and standard Zuiko OM it just
didn't make sense to change from Oly to Nikon.

Plus the fact that the 4/3rds format is strictly a full frame format
that is designed to work with the glass. Yes, there are low light
problems with 4/3rds because of sensor size, but that can be overcome
in post processing and from talking with several of the Olympus pros,
the E-3 has pretty much overcome that problem. I might add that the
520 also has a lot of the E-3 technology in it. You've seen some of
Rob's low light stuff and it's pretty impressive and Denis Grazic who
contributes to myfourthirds works exclusively in low light - well 90%
of the time anyway and he was just named an Olympus Visionary.

All kidding aside, I got into Oly very early when they were producing
the OM series. I felt, compared to my Nikon F-1 that is, they were
superior in most areas and that was in the 35 mm days - smaller,
lighter and to be perfectly honest (if only because I'm a putz - with
the RA/Lupus combination, I have a tendency to drop things) pretty
tough. When I broke my E-300, it dropped from a good five feet,
cracked the viewfinder, but the camera still takes really good images
- it's just annoying to have that cracked viewfinder.

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Boater wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
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!

I really have no idea what the 4/3rd group is selling as their
advantages, but I had it was a way for those with smaller market
share to be able to group together to allow them to compete against
Nikon and Canon.


There's a good if lengthy rundown on DP Review:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse3/page35.asp is the
conclusion page.


Interestingly, the camera is the same size as the Nikon d300

Olympus 5.6" x 4.6" x 2.9 " 1.9 pounds
Nikon 5.8 4.5 2.9 2 pounds

I'm sure it is a fine camera. Olympus knows how to build cameras. The
advantages of Four-Thirds format in semi-pro cameras remain to be seen.

That seemed to be a fairly objective review (very unusual for most mags
and web sites selling ads) and highlighted the pros and cons I have read
elsewhere.

For what it is worth, for a number of years, Nikon definitely trailed
behind Canon in both high end and point and shot digital cameras. It
was not until recently that they seemed to be the leader/innovator in
DSLR, including the prosumer and pro cameras. My guess is the state of
the art and the best in category camera will jump back and forth between
Canon and Nikon and neither will remain the top dog long enough enough
to get anyone to sell all of their glass to change brands. Today, it
looks like Nikon's aggressive design improvements has pushed it ahead of
Canon in the consumer and prosumer DSLR market.

As far as the consumer P&S market. in 2007 Nikon lagged behind Canon,
Sony, Kodak, Samsung and Olympus in that order. It wasn't till 2008
that Nikon really started to come up with competitive P&S cameras and
expanded it's line of low end DSLR. Coupled with an aggressive
marketing campaign, it will be interesting to see what that does to the
overall market share for digital cameras. I would be willing to bet
that Nikon exceeds Canon sales for the first time in a number of years.

From reading about the 4/3's system, it definitely has many advantages
and are used by some professionals whose needs are meet by the current
lens offered by Olympus. If you are a looking for a prosumer camera,
and have a large investment in Olympus glass, most amateurs would have a
hard time changing systems, especially if they prefer shooting in jpg vs
RAW and are not regularly shooting in low light, where Canon and Nikon
have the advantage.

Since it really isn't the camera or the glass that takes the photograph,
a first class award winning photograph can be taken with any camera,
including a hand made pin hole camera. Normally you only see passionate
arguments between Canon and Nikon users, so it is is nice to see someone
being passionate about Olympus. If you look at B&H enduser reviews,
they love the E-3.


As I stated, Olympus knows how to build good cameras, as do Nikon,
Canon, and many others.

I got started in 35mm with a used Kodak Retina. My first new 35SLR was a
Pentax, a wonderful camera. I traded that for a Nikormat, and then I got
my first Nikon F. That camera accompanied me to Louisiana and
Mississippi as a student reporter with some midwestern students who were
helping black folks register to vote. I had a thick web strap on that
camera, and I used that Nikon to fend off some locals who wanted to tip
over our car. Put a tiny dent in the camera. Ever since then, I've had a
spot in my heart for Nikon gear.

I still like well-made rangefinder cameras, though. They're small,
they're quiet. The Nikon F had an incredible noisy shutter and mirror.
It was impossible to "sneak" a news photo with it. With a LEICA, if no
one saw the camera, no one knew you were taking a photo.

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

On Dec 1, 7:55*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:13:50 -0500, Boater
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.

It's hard to rule the world with a 1% market penetration, which is about
what 4/3rds has now, and eTec has yet to achieve. *:)

Like I said - keep following all the other sheeple in your quest to
fit in.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

He only knows what he googles.

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Boater wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
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!

I really have no idea what the 4/3rd group is selling as their
advantages, but I had it was a way for those with smaller market
share to be able to group together to allow them to compete against
Nikon and Canon.


There's a good if lengthy rundown on DP Review:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse3/page35.asp is the
conclusion page.


Interestingly, the camera is the same size as the Nikon d300

Olympus 5.6" x 4.6" x 2.9 " 1.9 pounds
Nikon 5.8 4.5 2.9 2 pounds

I'm sure it is a fine camera. Olympus knows how to build cameras. The
advantages of Four-Thirds format in semi-pro cameras remain to be seen.

That seemed to be a fairly objective review (very unusual for most mags
and web sites selling ads) and highlighted the pros and cons I have read
elsewhere.

For what it is worth, for a number of years, Nikon definitely trailed
behind Canon in both high end and point and shot digital cameras. It
was not until recently that they seemed to be the leader/innovator in
DSLR, including the prosumer and pro cameras. My guess is the state of
the art and the best in category camera will jump back and forth between
Canon and Nikon and neither will remain the top dog long enough enough
to get anyone to sell all of their glass to change brands. Today, it
looks like Nikon's aggressive design improvements has pushed it ahead of
Canon in the consumer and prosumer DSLR market.

As far as the consumer P&S market. in 2007 Nikon lagged behind Canon,
Sony, Kodak, Samsung and Olympus in that order. It wasn't till 2008
that Nikon really started to come up with competitive P&S cameras and
expanded it's line of low end DSLR. Coupled with an aggressive
marketing campaign, it will be interesting to see what that does to the
overall market share for digital cameras. I would be willing to bet
that Nikon exceeds Canon sales for the first time in a number of years.

From reading about the 4/3's system, it definitely has many advantages
and are used by some professionals whose needs are meet by the current
lens offered by Olympus. If you are a looking for a prosumer camera,
and have a large investment in Olympus glass, most amateurs would have a
hard time changing systems, especially if they prefer shooting in jpg vs
RAW and are not regularly shooting in low light, where Canon and Nikon
have the advantage.

Since it really isn't the camera or the glass that takes the photograph,
a first class award winning photograph can be taken with any camera,
including a hand made pin hole camera. Normally you only see passionate
arguments between Canon and Nikon users, so it is is nice to see someone
being passionate about Olympus. If you look at B&H enduser reviews,
they love the E-3.


I meant to add that I dumped my Nikon D200 because I simply could never
get used to "DX." It was always creating conflicts between my eyes and
what they thought they should see and what remains of my brain, which
was trying to figure out why a 28 mm fixed focal length lens was a 42 mm
lens, sort of. The camera, though, is fabulous.

Now, I am back to "full frame" digital, and the conflict between my eyes
and my brain, at least on the focal length issue, is resolved. I also
like the much higher ISO performance.

-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

On Dec 1, 8:50*pm, 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, "
-----------------www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com- *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
------------------ Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Nice googling! What you fail to understand, dumb ass, is that Tom
never said the sensor wasn't smaller......

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

On Dec 1, 9:03*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
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.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Impossible. He's clueless on the subject and only knows what he's
googled.

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

On Dec 1, 9:11*pm, Boater wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:





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.

Oh, of course. I should buy into the PR.

Next time I attend an event in DC at which a zillion press photographers
are present, I'll count up all the 4/3'rds cameras, and see how that
number stacks up against the Nikons and Canons. The professional
photogs, of course, are not using the 4/3'rds cameras because they have
no interest in better quality.

That's partially true. Press photogs don't need the kind of quality
that 4/3rds can produce.

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

"Tim" wrote in message
...
On Dec 2, 4:30 am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 20:25:18 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:



On Dec 1, 9:52 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:30:29 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

On Dec 1, 7:15 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports

Well, the obvious is because I own it and we all know that I am one
to
emulate being the manly handsome dude that I am.

Who? YOU?

Of course me - who else?

In short, advanced technology - something not everybody appreciates.

Who? ME?

If the shoe fits...

14's?

14? What - you Shaquille O'Neal?

No, I just stand firm.
************************************************** **********

My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get
slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe)
Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one.

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

"Don White" wrote in message
...


My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get
slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe)
Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one.


My daughter's oldest son wears a size 13 right now. He's 12 years old.
Tall and lanky type.

Eisboch

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

On Dec 2, 10:29*am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message

...



My #2 son wears size 14. *Had to order all the way from the US to get
slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe)
Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one.

My daughter's oldest son wears a size 13 right now. * He's 12 years old..
Tall and lanky type.

Eisboch

When I was a freshman I started school weighing 135# , was 6"1" and
wore a 12.

My nephew is now 20,yr. 6''6" 285# and wears 16's


Too much growth hormones in the Big Mac's .

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Don White" wrote in message
...


My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get
slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe)
Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one.


My daughter's oldest son wears a size 13 right now. He's 12 years old.
Tall and lanky type.

Eisboch


Be thankful it is now and not 25 years ago. I wear sz 14 and they used to
charge extra for anything 13 and larger and limited selection. Now lots of
large sizes available. Send your daughter to Big 5 Sports for tennis shoes.
They have lots of closeouts of 13 and larger.

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
m...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Don White" wrote in message
...


My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get
slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe)
Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one.


My daughter's oldest son wears a size 13 right now. He's 12 years old.
Tall and lanky type.

Eisboch


Be thankful it is now and not 25 years ago. I wear sz 14 and they used to
charge extra for anything 13 and larger and limited selection. Now lots
of large sizes available. Send your daughter to Big 5 Sports for tennis
shoes. They have lots of closeouts of 13 and larger.

That's where we still are..hard to get the big sizes..... I guess with under
1 million people in the entire province, the market isn't big enough.
The internet sure comes in handy in finding clothes/hats/footware for big
uns'.

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 15:13:48 -0400, "Don White"
wrote:


"Calif Bill" wrote in message
om...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Don White" wrote in message
...


My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get
slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe)
Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one.


My daughter's oldest son wears a size 13 right now. He's 12 years old.
Tall and lanky type.

Eisboch


Be thankful it is now and not 25 years ago. I wear sz 14 and they used to
charge extra for anything 13 and larger and limited selection. Now lots
of large sizes available. Send your daughter to Big 5 Sports for tennis
shoes. They have lots of closeouts of 13 and larger.

That's where we still are..hard to get the big sizes..... I guess with under
1 million people in the entire province, the market isn't big enough.
The internet sure comes in handy in finding clothes/hats/footware for big
uns'.


LL Bean often carries 14's and sometimes 15's in their shoes.
--
John H

*Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year!*

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 15:13:48 -0400, "Don White"
wrote:


"Calif Bill" wrote in message
news:zYidnSxxrJxr5KjUnZ2dnUVZ_j2dnZ2d@earthlink. com...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Don White" wrote in message
...


My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get
slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe)
Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one.


My daughter's oldest son wears a size 13 right now. He's 12 years
old.
Tall and lanky type.

Eisboch


Be thankful it is now and not 25 years ago. I wear sz 14 and they used
to
charge extra for anything 13 and larger and limited selection. Now lots
of large sizes available. Send your daughter to Big 5 Sports for tennis
shoes. They have lots of closeouts of 13 and larger.

That's where we still are..hard to get the big sizes..... I guess with
under
1 million people in the entire province, the market isn't big enough.
The internet sure comes in handy in finding clothes/hats/footware for big
uns'.


LL Bean often carries 14's and sometimes 15's in their shoes.
--
John H


They inserted a flyer/catalogue in todays local newspaper.
I'd like to get a few 'Chamois Cloth Shirts', but that $40 US price inflated
by over 50% when duty, exchange rate, HST etc are added on.
They do have free shipping right now that helps a bit. (expires Jan 01)

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 15:41:39 -0400, "Don White"
wrote:


"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 15:13:48 -0400, "Don White"
wrote:


"Calif Bill" wrote in message
news:zYidnSxxrJxr5KjUnZ2dnUVZ_j2dnZ2d@earthlink .com...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Don White" wrote in message
...


My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get
slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe)
Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one.


My daughter's oldest son wears a size 13 right now. He's 12 years
old.
Tall and lanky type.

Eisboch


Be thankful it is now and not 25 years ago. I wear sz 14 and they used
to
charge extra for anything 13 and larger and limited selection. Now lots
of large sizes available. Send your daughter to Big 5 Sports for tennis
shoes. They have lots of closeouts of 13 and larger.

That's where we still are..hard to get the big sizes..... I guess with
under
1 million people in the entire province, the market isn't big enough.
The internet sure comes in handy in finding clothes/hats/footware for big
uns'.


LL Bean often carries 14's and sometimes 15's in their shoes.
--
John H


They inserted a flyer/catalogue in todays local newspaper.
I'd like to get a few 'Chamois Cloth Shirts', but that $40 US price inflated
by over 50% when duty, exchange rate, HST etc are added on.
They do have free shipping right now that helps a bit. (expires Jan 01)


If you get an LLBean VISA, shipping and monogramming are always free. We're
giving three grandsons sleeping bags for Christmas, and now they'll be
monogrammed.

Cool.
--
John H

*Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year!*

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

Don White wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message
...
On Dec 2, 4:30 am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 20:25:18 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:



On Dec 1, 9:52 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:30:29 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:
On Dec 1, 7:15 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
Well, the obvious is because I own it and we all know that I am one
to
emulate being the manly handsome dude that I am.
Who? YOU?
Of course me - who else?
In short, advanced technology - something not everybody appreciates.
Who? ME?
If the shoe fits...
14's?
14? What - you Shaquille O'Neal?

No, I just stand firm.
************************************************** **********

My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get
slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe)
Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one.



He should be buying his own slippers, Donnie. Did you get him underwear
and beer, too?

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

"D K" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message
...
On Dec 2, 4:30 am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 20:25:18 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:



On Dec 1, 9:52 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:30:29 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:
On Dec 1, 7:15 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
Well, the obvious is because I own it and we all know that I am one
to
emulate being the manly handsome dude that I am.
Who? YOU?
Of course me - who else?
In short, advanced technology - something not everybody appreciates.
Who? ME?
If the shoe fits...
14's?
14? What - you Shaquille O'Neal?

No, I just stand firm.
************************************************** **********

My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get
slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe)
Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one.

He should be buying his own slippers, Donnie. Did you get him underwear
and beer, too?


You cheap %$^^$# Don't you buy Christmas presents for your kids?

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

"D K" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message
...
On Dec 2, 4:30 am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 20:25:18 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:



On Dec 1, 9:52 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:30:29 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:
On Dec 1, 7:15 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
Well, the obvious is because I own it and we all know that I am one
to
emulate being the manly handsome dude that I am.
Who? YOU?
Of course me - who else?
In short, advanced technology - something not everybody appreciates.
Who? ME?
If the shoe fits...
14's?
14? What - you Shaquille O'Neal?

No, I just stand firm.
************************************************** **********

My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get
slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe)
Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one.

He should be buying his own slippers, Donnie. Did you get him underwear
and beer, too?


Slipper this, beer boy. Or is it beer this, slipper boy... no matter, I just
wanted to beat donny to the punch again. He's so witty!

--Mike

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

Don White wrote:
"D K" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message
...
On Dec 2, 4:30 am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 20:25:18 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:



On Dec 1, 9:52 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:30:29 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:
On Dec 1, 7:15 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
Well, the obvious is because I own it and we all know that I am one
to
emulate being the manly handsome dude that I am.
Who? YOU?
Of course me - who else?
In short, advanced technology - something not everybody appreciates.
Who? ME?
If the shoe fits...
14's?
14? What - you Shaquille O'Neal?
No, I just stand firm.
************************************************** **********

My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get
slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe)
Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one.
He should be buying his own slippers, Donnie. Did you get him underwear
and beer, too?


You cheap %$^^$# Don't you buy Christmas presents for your kids?


You cheap %$^^$# Don't you buy good Christmas presents for your kids?

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

On Dec 2, 3:26*pm, JohnH wrote:
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 15:41:39 -0400, "Don White"
wrote:







"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 15:13:48 -0400, "Don White"
wrote:

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
news:zYidnSxxrJxr5KjUnZ2dnUVZ_j2dnZ2d@earthlink .com...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
news:EYadnYVzm9cU_6jUnZ2dnUVZ_qHinZ2d@giganews .com...

"Don White" wrote in message
...

My #2 son wears size 14. *Had to order all the way from the US to get
slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe)
Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one.

My daughter's oldest son wears a size 13 right now. * He's 12 years
old.
Tall and lanky type.

Eisboch

Be thankful it is now and not 25 years ago. *I wear sz 14 and they used
to
charge extra for anything 13 and larger and limited selection. *Now lots
of large sizes available. *Send your daughter to Big 5 Sports for tennis
shoes. They have lots of closeouts of 13 and larger.

That's where we still are..hard to get the big sizes..... I guess with
under
1 million people in the entire province, the market isn't big enough.
The internet sure comes in handy in finding clothes/hats/footware for big
uns'.

LL Bean often carries 14's and sometimes 15's in their shoes.
--
John H

They inserted a flyer/catalogue in todays local newspaper.
I'd like to get a few 'Chamois Cloth Shirts', but that $40 US price inflated
by over 50% when duty, exchange rate, HST etc are added on.
They do have free shipping right now that helps a bit. (expires Jan 01)

If you get an LLBean VISA, shipping and monogramming are always free. We're
giving three grandsons sleeping bags for Christmas, and now they'll be
monogrammed.

Cool.
--
John H

*Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year!*- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yep!

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

"Mike" wrote in message
...

"D K" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message
...
On Dec 2, 4:30 am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 20:25:18 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:



On Dec 1, 9:52 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:30:29 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:
On Dec 1, 7:15 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
Well, the obvious is because I own it and we all know that I am one
to
emulate being the manly handsome dude that I am.
Who? YOU?
Of course me - who else?
In short, advanced technology - something not everybody
appreciates.
Who? ME?
If the shoe fits...
14's?
14? What - you Shaquille O'Neal?

No, I just stand firm.
************************************************** **********

My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get
slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe)
Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one.

He should be buying his own slippers, Donnie. Did you get him underwear
and beer, too?


Slipper this, beer boy. Or is it beer this, slipper boy... no matter, I
just wanted to beat donny to the punch again. He's so witty!

--Mike

You'd better start getting up a lot earlier in the morning.

Only 8 large for new nikon camera
 

Don White wrote:
"D K" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message
...
On Dec 2, 4:30 am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 20:25:18 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:



On Dec 1, 9:52 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:30:29 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:
On Dec 1, 7:15 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
Well, the obvious is because I own it and we all know that I am one
to
emulate being the manly handsome dude that I am.
Who? YOU?
Of course me - who else?
In short, advanced technology - something not everybody appreciates.
Who? ME?
If the shoe fits...
14's?
14? What - you Shaquille O'Neal?
No, I just stand firm.
************************************************** **********

My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get
slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe)
Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one.
He should be buying his own slippers, Donnie. Did you get him underwear
and beer, too?


You cheap %$^^$# Don't you buy Christmas presents for your kids?



I'm very generous but I don't reward slackers - my employees or others.