Not a DSLR, but some interesting features

No IS though, which is odd for something like this.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0506/05...ung_pro815.asp

In article , RichA
wrote:

No IS though, which is odd for something like this.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0506/05...ung_pro815.asp

Oh yeah...if it says Samsung, you know it's gotta be...uh...crap.
Should go well with any Sigma...maybe something by Goldstar or
Emerson...

RichA wrote:
No IS though, which is odd for something like this.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0506/05...ung_pro815.asp

It looked grotesque to me - and significantly no weight was quoted. Liked
the sensor, but no image stabilisation for a 420mm lens? An f/4.6 lens
when other offer f/2.8? Look where the EVF is stuck - a last minute
add-on?

David

RichA wrote:

No IS though, which is odd for something like this.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0506/05...ung_pro815.asp

Neat camera. Too bad it's a zlr. I like the waist-level shooting
feature using the top LCD.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Alan Browne wrote:
RichA wrote:

No IS though, which is odd for something like this.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0506/05...ung_pro815.asp

Neat camera. Too bad it's a zlr. I like the waist-level shooting
feature using the top LCD.

Cheers,
Alan

I like the idea of a v. large LCD and realtime image preview for copy-stand
work. But as always, lets see how the theory translates into reality. ;-)

--
Nigel_H

On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 07:46:09 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

RichA wrote:
No IS though, which is odd for something like this.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0506/05...ung_pro815.asp

It looked grotesque to me - and significantly no weight was quoted. Liked
the sensor, but no image stabilisation for a 420mm lens? An f/4.6 lens
when other offer f/2.8? Look where the EVF is stuck - a last minute
add-on?

David

I mentioned the "no weight" thing on another group. It might be a
plastic thing.
-Rich

On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 09:55:32 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

RichA wrote:

No IS though, which is odd for something like this.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0506/05...ung_pro815.asp

Neat camera. Too bad it's a zlr. I like the waist-level shooting
feature using the top LCD.

Cheers,
Alan

I finally got a chance to use my LCD at and angle yesterday to shoot
this:

http://usera.imagecave.com/rander312...incoupling.jpg

In article ,
says...
It looked grotesque to me - and significantly no weight was quoted. Liked
the sensor, but no image stabilisation for a 420mm lens? An f/4.6 lens
when other offer f/2.8? Look where the EVF is stuck - a last minute
add-on?

David


more likely an attempt to keep nose/cheek prints off the lcd screen.
--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.

RichA wrote:


I finally got a chance to use my LCD at and angle yesterday to shoot
this:

http://usera.imagecave.com/rander312...incoupling.jpg

Better photo if you soak the coupling in water or oil.



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Larry wrote:
In article ,
says...
It looked grotesque to me - and significantly no weight was quoted.
Liked the sensor, but no image stabilisation for a 420mm lens? An
f/4.6 lens when other offer f/2.8? Look where the EVF is stuck - a
last minute add-on?

David


more likely an attempt to keep nose/cheek prints off the lcd screen.

Being left-eye dominant, this camera probably is exactly wrong for me!

David