« OT (Music Notes): Greatest Covers Ever | Main | Must-See TV »

Monday, 27 December 2010

Comments

Yeah, turns out the best thing to do is just to ignore everything about a camera with a lot of hype until you know for certain that the actual product has been released and it's reasonably possible for people to know what they're talking about.

Restraint? Online? Surely you jest. :)

"... restraint is a characteristic of maturity, and maturity, I'll grant you, is no fun."

A fine example of why I read every post... thanks Mike!

Edward Bussa
Grand Rapids, MI

But Mike, the Internet buzz (good or bad) is a very strategically generated aspect of consumer electronics marketing (a category in which today's cameras are solid members). The opinions of the middle-aged males (the fingers of whom tap most of this cicada-like noise in the Web) are more pliable than a teen girl's emotions. When whatever camera comes out and becomes a gotta-have-it-now these same guys will be bitching that they can't find it anywhere.

This is, after all, how some people derive their pleasure from "photography." Don't be so critical. It's meaningless idle chatter. Ignore it all. In fact, save money and even ignore the camera! ;-)

Mike, a friend has offered to give me his screw-mount Pentax lenses. Will they work on the new generation of digital cameras, e.g. the K-5 or K-x? Thanks.

People also like to sound like they know what they're talking about. If some other guy (and its usually a guy) has a strong opinion about Unreleased Product X, its really easy to want to jump up and spew your opinion. Any attention is better than no attention at all, right? It may be more about filling some inner need for recognition than having anything to say about the product. Hey, look at me, I'm smart, too!

I remember reading a discussion about some new product that was just about to hit the streets (maybe it was the Sony NEX) and someone's entire comment was "Pass." Any particular reason? Maybe they were having a bad day or didn't have time to type anything more. I pictured a caricature of a Roman Emperor waving his hand, "This one bores me, bring me something shinier."

Of course, anyone has the right to pass on whatever they want, to hate stuff or love it for any reason whatsoever, but a complete and summary judgment on very little data just doesn't make sense (which of course was you point).

I was reading this post but decided after getting to the caveman myth it was not something I was going to be interested in.

I assume you got to the point - eventually...

« peoples' tendency to want to make up their minds without sufficient data is very persistent and very annoying. In both cases I am tempted to use a stronger intensifier than "very." »

I have wondered if this is amplified by the internets. this is a prevalent symptom of tech blogs, and the Silly Cone Valley dwellers... and the pontification of why something is bad and useless for them. worse yet, how "it" will not work for anyone else — despite not everyone else being so pedantic and short-sighted in their judgment, because they have not read the leaks on the web.

the buzzword around the interenets is Systemic Closure, which seems to also feed into the most ardent of hobbyist in photography and stereos.

the prediction of death for a product seems to have taken on equal significance for bona fides, as it is the scoop of the news. it is easy to achieve this with, say, Microsoft attempts these days, or even Yahoo! however, we the audience also devour it.

Three aspects to this:

1. True, I don't know much about the Fuji X100. (But that's not the same as knowing nothing.)

2. From what I do know, I know I'm not interested. I shoot a narrow range of subject matter in two general fields of photography, and that's not going to change. For one of those fields, I need lenses that vary from slightly long (~85mm) to long. In the other field, I need maximum flexibility -- zoom lenses, and a wide range of them. The X100 won't work in either area.

3. You don't necessarily have to be a dedicated photographer, or to handle a camera, to make some judgment about a camera's marketing viability. It's possible that the marketers for Fuji see a niche in the market where where an expensive, quite limited camera can thrive, and that the Fuji bean-counters will be satisfied with the limited return they get from it. On the other hand, as we've seen with other camera introductions, it's possible that they have no idea of what's going to happen, and the X100 will fall on its ass. This has nothing to do with the quality of the camera, and I don't think it's really necessary to have the camera in hand to make that kind of judgment. In fact, I think that kind of marketing judgment is almost always made (by the manufacturers) before they have a camera in hand.

None of this makes the X100 a bad camera. For somebody like Mike J, who has said a number of times that he rather likes the angle of view given by a 35mm lens, and values compactness, it could be perfect (but I don't know -- there may be other values involved.)

For me...I'd never use it.

"... and maturity, I'll grant you, is no fun."

I'd say it's a different kind of fun - slower, deeper, more satisfying, longer lasting.

Moose

"It's cold out. I'm middle aged. Sue me."

But Mike, the pentax K5 is a "coldproof design". Put on another layer and get out there.

Lend me the camera. I'll go shoot it in the cold, and I'll write you a report about how the thing does in poor weather!

(jk)

It's any gadget rumor/near rumor these days. The best one is the Verizon iPhone. It'll be here in about a month and people are debating it like it might not happen, or happen "so soon" ( when the best sources have repeatedly said it would ) or why it should/shouldn't happen, or what it should/shouldn't mean for Apple,AT&T and Verizon and on and on.

Meanwhile, Mike, if you're concerned about adequately breaking in the K-5 I humbly offer my services. You'd like an extra opinion available for publication, right? The layperson's angle, as it were?

Have you considered paragraph synopses of your posts?


Hey, just joking.

Go take a walk! It is much warmer today than it was a few days ago, and it's supposed to get warmer yet. It will help with your shrinkage project.

All I could come up with on my walk today was a shot of a crane as they rebuild UW-Madison's Charter St plant. But I got out there and tried. And I learned that I may almost have perfected my glove system for winter photography, and that the pants I have on are even better for winter camera hauling than they are for summer camera hauling.

Unfortunately, I was an idiot and forgot my long underwear.

"... restraint is a characteristic of maturity, and maturity, I'll grant you, is no fun."

A fine example of why I read every post... thanks Mike!

Edward Bussa
Grand Rapids, MI

It's Why I Read Every Post, Too!

While Speculation and Hypotheses have their place both in the world and in discussing 'things photographic', that place isn't 'Up On The Ramparts' girded for 'Battle'! :-)

Richard W.
Cedar Springs, Mi.

What is it about cameras (cameras, not photography) that engenders such strong and often ridiculous opinions from people? I had an assignment a few weeks ago to photograph a gentleman for a portrait/personality feature. He looked askance at my pair of elderly Nikon D2hs cameras and asked "How the (heck) do you do your job with those Nikons? How come you don't use Canon?" I had the feeling that he was seriously thinking of refusing to be photographed by a Nikon-wielding shooter.

I read books.Reading a book takes time and an appreciation that all will be made clear in time. Culture today appears to need instant results. So people need to jump to instant conclusions, which is so sad..who was it who said "the camera is a musical instrument"? was it Kertesz? So the idea is to learn its range, to slowly master its nuances...you won't get this from the internet population! What's the rush?
Happy New Year, Mike!

Mike, I completely agree. The even bigger problem comes from people not being able to admit that they were wrong.

If you have ever been on the Leica forum, you will know that the battles there make the ones here seem like reasonable debates. When the M8 came out, you had the film guys scream that digital is awful and the digital people say "film is dead." Then the M9 came out and I got the camera for a week to test it, so I wrote my positive impression and raved about the camera. Oh boy, were the M8 die-hards offended that a new camera could possibly be better.

Oh well, things got so heated that people talked themselves into a corner and some will never be able to let themselves upgrade to an M8, others will never shoot film again, and others yet are so paralyzed and confused about the internet debates that they cannot buy anything ever because they are afraid that something new will make it obsolete. In the end that leave a whole lot of people, whose hobby is photography, yet they never take any pictures. Too bad for them, but then again, getting all worked up over the internet is an addictive hobby all in itself.

I totally agree with this article. It is the most sensible and logical way of looking at such things, the way a mature person will reason upon such matters.

Boring? yes. No fun? Yes. But I'll tell you what, being sensible might be boring but it will save you a fortune and you'll actually be out taking photos while others are just talking about and planning to purchase imaginary cameras that don't even exist yet. Dontcha just love the internet? LOL

Um,
Could you please post a 10 word summary infront of every article -- I'm sure it's a fine article, but I just don't, you know--whatever....

when it finally does come out, we'll probably be scratching our heads thinking, "that's it?"

I can't believe I just heard what you didn't say - and I'm telling all my friends!!

And once the new gear is released, those who who buy must strive against those who've already decided it's the Ultimate Answer and/or junk. Endless discussions before it exists, and reality v. vapor arguments afterward. Strange days indeed.

"Surely you jest"

Hey don't call him Shirley. (my tribute to recently departed Leslie Nielson.)

"a) absolutely not having adequate data and simultaneously b) wanting to dicuss the inadequate data to death and come to hard, definitive conclusions even though they demonstrably can't possibly know what the hell they're talking about."

What would we do on forums if we couldn't do that?

Mike,

I wonder if the reason why people do this kind of endless, baseless, speculation, is that it's part of the never-ending process of justifying future camera purchases. (Or justifying past purchases!) Every two years, camera technology advances about as much as it did in a decade or two. So of course, people are baffled about what kind of differences are really important.*

In the twenty months since I bought my last camera, I've considered a A850, K-20D, k-x, Nex 3, Nex 5, EP-1, EP-2, EPL-1, GF-1, a Leica X1, NX100, and a K-5. I'd be broke if I'd actually bought all those. And terribly, terribly, disappointed, because the difference between good cameras - even (especially?) really good ones is pretty small.**

Just today, I had to reconsider my opinion of the Nex 5, thanks to a well written review by Dante Stella. I didn't even know I had a strong opinion about it! I am particularly grateful to you and Ctein for your occasional comments on equipment, since they are based in, you know, reality.

Will

*the secret answer is: high ISO noise, not megapixels. At least, it was the answer for the past 24 month period. "Viewfinder" is probably the secret answer for the next 24 months, thus the froth over the Fuji X100.
**and the few differences are usually heartbreaking, not wonderful - poor autofocus, shadow noise, crippled feature sets... (e.g. no remote shutter, off center tripod screw...)

"I wonder if the reason why people do this kind of endless, baseless, speculation, is that it's part of the never-ending process of justifying future camera purchases"

Will,
Well, that's a good point, and probably has a lot of merit. There are a whole lot of posts that go something like "What I really need is a camera that does [describes what desired camera does best] and the reason I can't use [the camera I have / the other more sensible options] is...." And in fact, I have done that my own self a time or two.

Mike

I gave my brother and his wife a Bachmann On30 Climax for Christmas. (That's not a camera, it's a model railroad engine.) I'd seen descriptions of the model on-line, in eBay offerings, etc.

I went to a real brick and mortar hobby shop to buy it. I was totally unprepared for the actual model's solidity, heft, detailing, etc. - not at all what I've come to expect in my "rigorous" analysis. The model's specs may be unchanged, but the emotional and qualitative attributes were transformed.

I'm reminded of the discussion some time ago by the "Car Guys" on NPR. The question: Can two people who know little or nothing on a topic have a discussion which results in them walking away knowing even less? The answer, I believe, was "yes"...

Mike you do realize that The Week magazine you describe is exactly what the original version of Time magazine set out to do and succeeded very well at it.

X100...I'll buy it no matter what...why? Because this type of camera needs to have success so other manufactures will wake up, follow suit and improve on it...an like my grandfather used to say..."Wanting is better than getting."

I hope you'll enjoy your K-5. I'm certainly liking the one I have. Got some nice shots of a local eagle on my Christmas morning bike ride. No camera problems at all and it must have been 15 below zero with the wind chill along the lake.

I doubt the prevalence of talking rubbish is restricted to cameras ... people have been talking rubbish on many subjects for years!

But it's only the prevalence of the internet that's given these people a semi-permanent platform.

Further, there will always be the small percentage of people who have cultivated a certain level of discernment and will do their own investigation (which includes reading reputable reviews).

BTW, I'm surprised how few people have wised up to the fact that TV "news" is just another form of entertainment.

Nicholas,
You're saying you'd buy a $1000+ camera just to encourage the company that makes it?

Mike

"Mike, a friend has offered to give me his screw-mount Pentax lenses. Will they work on the new generation of digital cameras, e.g. the K-5 or K-x? Thanks."

Yes Chris, but you will have to buy an adapter, which can be found on the internet cheap. It can only be used in manual mode with focus assistance.

As to the X100 and SD1, I can wait. I certainly waited long enough for the Pentax K10D.

I think they are all a bunch of Nattering Nabobs of Negativism!

Seriously, I think the problem is that in the present age everyone has a megaphone--be they denizens of internet forums or "pundits" on one of the over 400 channels that now stream into my home TV. The bar to entry is extremely low and there are no longer any editors. Put that all together and you get a whole lot of noise, and very little light. Or as we geeks say, very poor signal to noise ratio.

The most frequent thought that comes to my mind when exposed to these folks endless nattering is "And exactly why am I supposed to give a (blank) about what this person thinks or says???"


I think Jay Tunkel's comment is right on point. It reminds me of a true story about Thomas Reed, a famously brilliant Speaker of the US House of Representatives around 1900.

Some long-winded orator exceeded his allotted speaking time without really saying anything. Reed dismissed him with the comment: "Sir - the purpose of political debate is provide either information or misinformation and you have done neither."

By the way, both of the Car Talk guys have MIT degrees.

My advice would be to stop soaking in all that negative energy; stop reading those forums and you'll feel much happier.
And this is a great time of the year to see how the K5 performs indoors with a fast lens and high iso's. I did and was very, very pleased with it except for the auto white balans under incandescent light... best get that WhiBal card out of your wallet for that.
Best, Nick

When it came to analyzing something new my father didn't have much patience for my 2 bits. His favorite expression was "don't confuse me with the facts, my mind's already made up".

"...even if the noise turned out to be two tree-trunks rubbing together in the wind."

Am I really the only one who found this a bit risqué?

Mike, it's specs Mike and specs are important. I once bought an AW4416 HDR (for 12.000 DM about 6.000 dollars) in june and it didn't arrive in the stores till september that year. I owned one for 10 years and recorded several albums with it (for other artists) and it was a great machine. I could tell that only from specs. I sold it to a Dutch band for a 1000 dollars 10 years later (a major Dutch band). So if I say on specs alone that a X100 doesn't cut it for me, that does not mean I dismis a camera, just that the SPECS don't sound interresting to me. I use zoom a lot to frame and framing is the centerpeace of my pictures. I own a fast prime (shooting prime ain't no crime), but the Fuji's 35 isn't that fast either. It would be a great second camera but I haven't got second camera money (that is if I have to fork over 1000 euro's to own it). So for some people the specs are heaven send for other's they just don't cut it. Buying a camera is a contious decision. I read the mannuals of the GH1, the G2, the Pen2 and the GF1 before I parted with my cash, for instance (as well as every review known to men). But believe me I would throw an X100 out of the window if someone gave it to me for Xmas.....allas knowone did :-).

Dear Mike,

Two related points:

1) When I was in Toronto I had a revelatory conversation with Michael Reichman about camera markets. Simply put, the make-or-break markets for several cameras that have been hotly discussed here over the past year were not the US, Europe, or even Japan. They were China and India. Although their middle/upper-class percentages are small compared to the so-called Western World, their absolute populations are huge, growing rapidly, and have not been buried in consumer goods for the past 30 years. Consequently, when those markets decide to take to a camera, even on a minor fractional basis, the economics dwarf anything else in the world.

Consequently, I've decided I'm not even going have a private opinion about whether or not a camera will make it in the market, let alone a public one. I don't know those Asian cultures or markets at all, and for me to guess about the likely success of the camera would be about as useful as me speculating on who will win the SuperBowl (I don't even know the names of football teams).

2) There's a very simple explanation for the folks who post single word comments like “pass.” Huge and clueless egocentrism. They genuinely believe that the other umpteen thousand readers actually care about their single vote.

Folks who post emphatic opinions about the prospective success or failure of a camera in the marketplace based purely upon their personal tastes in cameras are only slightly better. I'll eliminate the word “huge” from the preceding description [snarky smile]. But otherwise, of the same ilk.

My general rule is that the more I see somebody engage in that kind of behavior, the less I'm interested in their opinions in any conversation. They've demonstrated they are lacking in judgment and analytic ability; why should I trust them on any other matter?


pax \ Ctein
[ Please excuse any word-salad. MacSpeech in training! ]
======================================
-- Ctein's Online Gallery http://ctein.com 
-- Digital Restorations http://photo-repair.com 
======================================

On reflection that regardless of how many reviews I have ever read about a particular camera, the only ones I've bought had wowed me in a particular way when I held it in a shop.

On the other hand, I suppose all this pre-launch noise is just a measure of how good the marketing department is doing... and that game in itself is rather interesting.

Pak

In the case of the SD1 I suspect you'll find there's primarily two camps, those who believe the hype and those who are expecting more of the same from Sigma.

Sigma has a tradition of over-promising and underdelivering in terms of performance, features and ship dates. A lot of people (including myself) see it as likely that the SD1 is simply more of the same from Sigma. If they do ship when promised with performance vaguely close to what was promised people might start changing their tune. But it's good to recall the SD15 was two years late in shipping.

Suppose someone were to offer for sale a new rice cooker, a beautifully-crafted one styled to look like a very traditional Japanese rice pot. Suppose the previews of it set the internet aflame with people who have been wishing for such a traditionally-styped rice cooker, and who are, sight unseen, singing its praises to the heavens.

I might look to my pot on its small burner on the counter and think, "I love rice, and I have made good rice in this pot with this burner. I have also made many other good things with this pot and burner. While the new rice cooker is very pretty, I do not have the money or space for a tool that does only one thing, especially something I can already do well with what I have."

Suppose that posting this thought triggered a wave of shrill advocacy for rice cookers in general and the new, unreleased one in particular, calling me a fool for not seeing why my pot and burner are inadequate. In the background, as well, there might be the low drone of traditionalists who, with a tired tone of grumpy condescension, react to any discussion of rice cookery by insisting that the old method of iron pots over hot coals cannot be improved. Added to this might be the cries of those who insist that it is foolish and premature to express any sort of formed opinion about the upcoming rice cooker until it can be handled.

I do not want a rice cooker, and deciding such without having personally handled a particular rice cooker is not a rush to judgment. And perhaps it is not unreasonable to be annoyed, amidst the din, at being told otherwise.

Mike, I'm wondering what brought on this call for restraint. Maybe I'm not hanging around in the right circles, but I've yet to see seriously, dogged, foaming-at-the-mouth.

"What is it about cameras (cameras, not photography) that engenders such strong and often ridiculous opinions from people? I had an assignment a few weeks ago to photograph a gentleman for a portrait/personality feature. He looked askance at my pair of elderly Nikon D2hs cameras and asked "How the (heck) do you do your job with those Nikons? How come you don't use Canon?" I had the feeling that he was seriously thinking of refusing to be photographed by a Nikon-wielding shooter."

It's silly and goes every which way. Back in the '90s, I was giving a slide presentation of photos taken at a local nature preserve to a group of interested folks. One gentleman asked what type of equipment I used. When I answered Canon, he asked why I didn't use Nikon and actually stormed out after I said it really didn't matter.

Good thing Trog didn't have a X100 on his hands. He would probably be mesmerized by it's beautiful simplicity, those curvy dials and all... he would hear the shriek and think: "Maybe there's a bautiful and peaceful tiger out there in the bushes, i have to take his portrait!".
Trog wouldn't live a very long life, you know... but the archaeologists would probably recover some pretty nice tiger portraits. :-)

One of my pet dislikes is the spawning of 'pre' in front of words like, 'order', I'm sure I will soon hear pre-prefix. Indeed what we now get in current affairs is pre-news: I'm sure that makes sense and I suspect it will soon turn up as an actual TV slot before the real news. This pre-news show would of course be a perfect example of pre-programming. The commentator and audience composition would almost* entirely be of preposterous, presumptuous, pretentious prats. There !

*I leave room for those who genuinely make me laugh.

Have a more than satisfactory New Year, Mike.

Sorry, I thought this was the tiger sketch in Monty Python's "The Meaning of Life." I'll come back later...

Mike, I completely agree. The even bigger problem comes from people not being able to admit that they were wrong.
Bernd Reinhardt.
-----

Had sent Mike a note under separate cover a while back espousing this very topic.

I hit 65 next year, and admit it is a a realization the downward slope of life is shorter than the upward slope.

Have reverted photographically to my form of enjoyment. Still retain my NIkon F100
with one medium range zoom, and was able to purchase a new still in the box Nikon D40, with a similar lense. That's it. I shoot only JPEGs and am also selling my 27" six month old iMac. It is just too big, too unweildy and cumbersome. Photo modification I don't do, as with a colour slide, what comes back to me is what comes back. Sold my D90 to a friend at a loss but the D90, as much as an iPod or iPad is far too complicated for my feeble mind to comprehend. Also have a 6 gig iPod G4 here, agsin, find it difficult to comprehend, my big fingers are not friendly to tiny keyboards.

Too many options, too many toys, far too many bits and pieces to go wrong.

Then too with the D40 there is no compulsion to take photographs, thinking of money burning under the auspices of the newest greatest and latest.

I need to keep my money on my side, and avoid temptation whatever it may be.

Happy New Year to all!


I don't get it. Which one am I supposed to buy?

Y´all know that today is fool´s day in many parts of the world?

Is this post that kind of joke? [The april Fool´s day joke "du-jour"?]

I do think the Onion may have preempted all further discussion on this topic in an article from December, 2009:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/new-device-desirable-old-device-undesirable,2862/

Have fun!

Dave

They've demonstrated they are lacking in judgment and analytic ability; why should I trust them on any other matter?

Oh c'mon Ctein, I don't think you really mean that.

A friend of mine has an MD and a Phd in biology. I've spent dozens of enlightening hours talking with him about those subjects.

His political opinions are goofy. I just ignore the one in order to benefit from the other. I bet you would too...

Sven W - You are so right. The worst scenario of what you said is radio phone in's for me. Argh, give the man on the street his right to state his point of view on the news! Sounds good in theory maybe but provides a platform for every village idiot from here to Timbuctoo and any sensible views get lost amongst the dross and insane.

In electronics, the term signal to noise ratio refers to the amount of wanted signal versus the amount of other stuff (noise).

The signal to noise ratio of the Internet is extremely poor. The noise floor is very high, sometimes swamping the signal.

This reminds me of the days when I studied RADAR in the 1970's, and found that the reflection of the signal bouncing back to the antenna from a distant aircraft was incredibly weak, and not easy to detect among the constant noise. The same can often be said for the results of a search query or the browsing of a discussion thread on the Internet today.

Part of the solution in RADAR is to somehow filter the noise so the signal can be detected. But how to filter the Internet?

Here's my suggestion, at least for photography. Firstly: ban all announcements of new products prior to the day the cameras arrive on the shelves of the dealers for sale. Secondly: ban posting of comments on the Internet by anyone who hasn't actually used the new product.

The noise floor would drop dramatically if the above two filters were applied. The signal would be much more clear and easily found, without the fatigue that noise induces in us all.

Just a suggestion.

Many of us (me included) are increasingly sick and tired of unearned hype and overblown marketing statements regurgitated without critique. Who needs marketers when everybody becomes one?

I thought maybe "That's Not a Tiger:" had something to do with this -

Although I found myself nodding along as I read this post, I can understand all the excitement about the Fuji X100. Although this camera does not exist, we know that Fuji has brought a great many unconventional ideas from announcement to reality.

In addition, the X100 concept ticks a whole list of boxes which you and others have been compiling for years now. Sure, anyone can check boxes without bringing out product, but no one else has checked all of these boxes before, so that in itself is progress.

Nevertheless, I am personally much less excited about the X100 than I once would have been. My boxes have changed. As much as I romanticized the idea of using just one focal length, I know that in reality, I like to use a variety of focal lengths.

TROG!

You are killing me. I saw that at drive-in when I was a kid.

Hilarious reference.

Dear Paris,

Ahh, yes I did. Your friend is someone you KNOW. You have reason to be assured that his nonpolitical opinions are worth paying attention to.

If all you knew of him were political raving he posted on line, would you give him much credence?

More to the point, I'm not even talking about someone's expertise in one field vs another. It's more as if supposing all you knew of your friend were goofy political theories he posted, would you be inclined, then, to give much weight to anything about politics he posted?

When I see someone posting goofy ideas about photography, it does not incline me to take anything they have to say about photography MORE seriously.

pax / Ctein

You will love your K-5!

I've been a Pentax DSLR user for a while - used to be FF guy with some lovely Minox 35s, plus a SLR or two - began with the K-x a year ago, but soon heard about the coming camera, the one that eventually arrived as the K-5 (which has proved to have the most pleasant colour rendering of any digital camera I've come across - in short close to perfect).

So, of course, I should have waited till the first arrived and was reviewed, but oh no!

I just couldn't wait, and bought a brand new K-7, which has a few really nice points (which has carried across to the K-5), and a lot of bad points, that now are history (hopefully never to reappear), like abysmal ISO range, if you don't like noise!

Then after having shot a few thousand with the K-7 it is now a museum piece, as my friendly retailer was willing to pay me a grand total of nil, if I'd try to use it as a trade-in.

So, as you write, apply some brakes and just wait - till at least some reviews have hit the internet! Then you'll know if it is as good as the advertising guys claim - for the Fuji they promise heaven, and then some more :-(!

Fuji's new marvel surprises me as the lens is fixed - I love the specs, but I kind of like a choice of primes to go with my cameras!

Not that I am without zooms, but from a portability (and sharpness) standpoint primes are to prefer! There are exceptions (zooms that are as sharp and fast as their prime colleages), of course, but not many!

Actually, I have it on good evidence that the shriek Trog heard was Grunk's as he was reading a rumor excavation site mentioning a possible upcoming new cave-painting color.

The comments to this entry are closed.