Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell
1 2 3 … 80 81 82 … 137 138 end

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #1 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

sebboh wrote:
Bijltje wrote:
But like I say above the M still feels like a more simple camera. Maybe its not in the buttons, but in the features.

i think a lot of it is psychological – the m looks like a simple camera because it looks like an old film camera that was simple. the rx1 looks like a typical high tech compact, which we associate with feature bloat and crappy industrial design.

I think it goes quite a bit beyond that. The M9 *is* a film camera with digital inside and a few extra buttons on the back. As such, the traditional controls allow you to do almost everything you need, without touching the back at all, which is only really needed for ISO, review and formatting cards.

The Sonys are all modern cameras like Canons and Nikons, and the interface is completely different. Everything is somewhere else, for no particular reason, and features like panorama which are accessed very rarely under normal circumstances have been promoted to the most desirable locations on the body. The whole design is just a complete jumble. Some manufacturers are better, some worse, in this regard. I prefer the Nikons of the modern designs because there are something like four buttons which cover all my needs, and they are clearly labelled with a single function. Still, the Nikons are definitely also complex, and are not ideal from my standpoint.

My ideal camera would have an aperture ring with an A at the end, a shutter speed ring with an A at the end, an ISO button with a dial somewhere, and an exposure compensation button, possibly combined with one of the above dials. The rest would be tucked away or hidden in menus. There would be a quick-set menu for a few obvious settings, no more than a screenful, possible customisable, and the rest would be in some other large menu, well organised. Nothing else. No drive modes, quality settings, bracketing, WB, none of all that stuff. Maybe a single review button, a Nikon-style joystick, and an AF/AE lock, as well as the menu button.

If the RX1 had come anywhere close to that, I would have been quite interested, but another medium-sized digital camera with a modern interface and a somewhat smaller size than my DSLR is just not that compelling to me. Maybe if my back or space constraints get worse.

Edited on Nov 22, 2012 at 10:04 PM · View previous versions

Nov 22, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Bijltje
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #2 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

I agree its psychological for some part.

wolfloid wrote:

Bought a remote control for the NEX, the shop assistance and I were looking for 30 minutes to find out how it worked. Who in earth puts it under the drive modus...

Canon.
Really? Maybe its me than

Nov 22, 2012 at 10:04 PM

michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #3 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

douglasf13 wrote:
Frankly, whether I'm shooting NEX, the A900, M9, X100, etc., the dials and layout all work pretty well for me, since I usually just set the camera up once and only really access shutter, aperture, and occasionally ISO from there. I've never really had much of a problem with any menu system after a few days..

Similar experience here but sometimes implementation details can be maddening. I like to pick on the X100 - that stupid RAW button which could not be redefined as a custom Fn button (until a firmware release finally showed up not all that long ago). The X100 had too few user-definable buttons - one was not enough for me. Two... would have made a notable difference.

I liked the look of the NEX-7 layout and probably the -6 would feel good too. The -5 didn't frustrate me too much and sure was comfortable to hold for long periods of time.

What I do like about the the Fujis and my M9 is that the shutter and aperture dials are labelled

For me as long as there is a usable shutter speed dial, I'm not too bothered whether it is marked or not but I do prefer it not be forced to share duty with other functions though.

The majority of the time I have my cameras set to aperture priority and I like on-lens aperture rings, marked, for comfort and usability, and highly doubt I'd be nearly this interested in the RX1 if it didn't have one.

On the GXR I've been making a lot of use of the mode dial on top - with different customizations having been stored in A, My1, My2, My3, and S modes. This is the first camera where I've taken time to develop different working profiles - you can change everything or nothing in each mode on the GXR - and now I'm not certain that a shutter speed dial would work better for me. Moving from Aperture priority to Shutter priority and engaging a different customization would require a dial change and a menu access rather than just a dial change. And the same in reverse. Anyway, either way, one adapts.

I also like the presence of a manual focus distance indicator, whether it be on the lens itself like with manual lenses, or at least on the LCD like the Fujis. Does the RX1 have a digital distance indicator?

Yes, plus focus peaking.

To me (and I think Sony,) the RX1 is ALL about being small, so, if you're not interested in small, then there are many other alternative options out there.

I won't know until mine arrives, but from what I do know of the RX1, it seems that Sony had a much grander vision for the RX1 than simply reaching a size target for a full frame sensor camera. We'll see in six months once the love affair inevitably wears off.

Nov 22, 2012 at 10:10 PM

sebboh
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #4 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

carstenw wrote:
I think it goes quite a bit beyond that. The M9 *is* a film camera with digital inside and a few extra buttons on the back. As such, the traditional controls allow you to do almost everything you need, without touching the back at all, which is only really needed for ISO, review and formatting cards.

The Sonys are all modern cameras like Canons and Nikons, and the interface is completely different. Everything is somewhere else, for no particular reason, and features like panorama which are accessed very rarely under normal circumstances have been promoted to the most desirable locations on the body. The whole design is just a complete jumble. Some manufacturers are better, some worse, in this regard. I prefer the Nikons of the modern designs because there are something like four buttons which cover all my needs, and they are clearly labelled with a single function. Still, the Nikons are definitely also complex, and are not ideal from my standpoint.

My ideal camera would have an aperture ring with an A at the end, a shutter speed ring with an A at the end, an ISO button with a dial somewhere, and an exposure compensation button, possibly combined with one of the above dials. The rest would be tucked away or hidden in menus. There would be a quick-set menu for a few obvious settings, no more than a screenful, possible customisable, and the rest would be in some other large menu, well organised. Nothing else. No drive modes, quality settings, bracketing, WB, none of all that stuff. Maybe a single review button, a Nikon-style joystick, and an AF/AE lock, as well as the menu button.

If the RX1 had come anywhere close to that, I would have been quite interested, but another medium-sized digital camera with a modern interface and a somewhat smaller size than my DSLR is just not that compelling to me. Maybe if my back or space constraints get worse.

ah, you are one of those people that likes to make adjustments while looking down at the camera. i prefer to be looking through the viewfinder when i make adjustments. that's why i prefer the controls on my minolta slr to my contax slr – everything can be done through the viewfinder without moving your hands out of shooting position and you can see what the settings are through the viewfinder.

the ideal camera for me has an aperture ring on on the lens, a shutter speed dial, an iso dial, an exposure compensation dial, a AEL button, and a focus assist button. all of these except the aperture ring must be operable with the right hand while i look through the viewfinder, i'd like to keep my left for focus and aperture control. the rx1 one checks all those boxes so i will be perfectly happy with it's controls (much happier than i would be with any current dslr). the only extraneous thing i see on it button and dial wise is the shooting mode dial, like you i would just add an A setting to the iso, shutter speed and aperture controls. were i designing it, i would make the shooting mode dial into the iso dial, i would switch the exposure compensation and shutter speed (main jog dial) dials around, and i would leave the iso dial (wheel below thumb rest) unassigned.

Nov 22, 2012 at 11:35 PM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #5 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

ah, you are one of those people that likes to make adjustments while looking down at the camera. i prefer to be looking through the viewfinder when i make adjustments. that's why i prefer the controls on my minolta slr to my contax slr – everything can be done through the viewfinder without moving your hands out of shooting position and you can see what the settings are through the viewfinder.

Actually, i would prefer that too, I was just trying not to use a film camera as my example. I do not want all the crap in the viewfinder either, though, just aperture, shutter, ISO, and exposure compensation, and an indication of over/under-exposure somehow. The OM cameras did most of this nicely, but there are other clean designs too.

the ideal camera for me has an aperture ring on on the lens, a shutter speed dial, an iso dial, an exposure compensation dial, a AEL button, and a focus assist button. all of these except the aperture ring must be operable with the right hand while i look through the viewfinder, i'd like to keep my left for focus and aperture control.

It sounds like we want more or less the same thing, I just want dedicated marked buttons, and for all of the rest to go away. And I don't want a menu with a million settings which could be set wrong, and which would take hours with the manual to check. I have a four-year old daughter who can reconfigure things deep down in mere seconds, when unsupervised.

Nov 22, 2012 at 11:50 PM

sebboh
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #6 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

carstenw wrote:
ah, you are one of those people that likes to make adjustments while looking down at the camera. i prefer to be looking through the viewfinder when i make adjustments. that's why i prefer the controls on my minolta slr to my contax slr – everything can be done through the viewfinder without moving your hands out of shooting position and you can see what the settings are through the viewfinder.

Actually, i would prefer that too, I was just trying not to use a film camera as my example. I do not want all the crap in the viewfinder either, though, just aperture, shutter, ISO, and exposure compensation, and an indication of over/under-exposure somehow. The OM cameras did most of this nicely, but there are other clean designs too.

the ideal camera for me has an aperture ring on on the lens, a shutter speed dial, an iso dial, an exposure compensation dial, a AEL button, and a focus assist button. all of these except the aperture ring must be operable with the right hand while i look through the viewfinder, i'd like to keep my left for focus and aperture control.

It sounds like we want more or less the same thing, I just want dedicated marked buttons, and for all of the rest to go away. And I don't want a menu with a million settings which could be set wrong, and which would take hours with the manual to check. I have a four-year old daughter who can reconfigure things deep down in mere seconds, when unsupervised.

i would just like a lock for the menu or way to save my settings, no need to get rid of features somebody might want. my daughter's only two, but so far i've kept her away from my camera by just giving her a camera of her own.

edit: one of the great things about sony evfs (has olympus finally gotten better about this?) is you can customize the info in them pretty well. you can have it all or nothing or lots of different places in between.

Nov 22, 2012 at 11:55 PM

navyasw02
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #7 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

Man this conversation has just gone down a ridiculous rabbit hole. Seriously now you guys are complaining about the simplicity of the camera? What's so hard about it, you set it up and you're done. You can customize every button on the back so you never have to go into the menu again. This camera is so easy mine isn't even in English and I can figure it out. Am I missing something?

Nov 23, 2012 at 01:07 AM

Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #8 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

navyasw02 wrote:
Man this conversation has just gone down a ridiculous rabbit hole. Seriously now you guys are complaining about the simplicity of the camera? What's so hard about it, you set it up and you're done. You can customize every button on the back so you never have to go into the menu again. This camera is so easy mine isn't even in English and I can figure it out. Am I missing something?

Yep, you own it, they dont.

Nov 23, 2012 at 01:10 AM

sebboh
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #9 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

Nov 23, 2012 at 01:30 AM

Spyro P.
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #10 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

On face value this camera should be right down my alley, but for some reason it didnt get me excited and I've been trying to figure out why...

I think what I find somewhat silly is the shape more than anything else, I mean you have a camera that is small in every possible dimension except for depth, because of the lens. But that dimension alone means that the camera is never going to fit anywhere that an x100 or a nex or even an M9 with 35/2 won't fit, so there goes the size advantage. But if there is really no size advantage, why not make it a little bit wider like an x100,or a NEX, and squeeze a viewfinder in the body? So you can avoid all the annoyances and limited usability of attachable VFs? Which make the shape even more awkward?

(click here to see size comparison with lenses attached)

I guess what I'm trying to say is that making the camera so small seems more like a show off to me (look how small we can make a FF camera) rather than giving any useful advantage, and at the same time costing in real usability (built-in VF)

Also a bit wider would make it more comfortable to hold because this camera is not light, it's about the same weight as an M9 with summicron. Some people dont use neck straps

Nov 23, 2012 at 02:36 AM

Spyro P.
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #11 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

When it comes to sizes the "depth" dimension is by far the more important one, to me anyway. The best example I can think of was the Fuji GA645, which is a quite large, medium format camera

This image is copyrighted by the owner

But it's flat.
And because it's flat, it would fit in my jacket pocket (even my suit jacket pocket if needs be), which meant that I didnt need a bag. I doubt if the RX1 would fit, which is fine, it's just that I'm having a hard time justifying the design decisions (no VF) just because the camera is small. It is small, but in a weird way... it is narrow and pointy

Nov 23, 2012 at 03:12 AM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #12 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

michaelwatkins wrote:

I won't know until mine arrives, but from what I do know of the RX1, it seems that Sony had a much grander vision for the RX1 than simply reaching a size target for a full frame sensor camera. We'll see in six months once the love affair inevitably wears off.

What kind of grander vision? If this camera was the size of a DSLR, I don't think it would be compelling.

I agree with what Spyro says, though. Making the camera slightly larger to accommodate a built-in EVF wouldn't likely affect its packability and carry convenience, but Sony stated (somewhere) that making it as small as possible was the goal. I understand that, in terms of bragging rights, but sticking the NEX-6 EVF in the corner would have brought even more shooters aboard, I'd imagine.

Good to know that Sony added a focus distance indicator to the RX1. I wish the NEX cameras had that.

Nov 23, 2012 at 03:26 AM

sebboh
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #13 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

douglasf13 wrote:
I agree with what Spyro says, though. Making the camera slightly larger to accommodate a built-in EVF wouldn't likely affect its packability and carry convenience, but Sony stated (somewhere) that making it as small as possible was the goal. I understand that, in terms of bragging rights, but sticking the NEX-6 EVF in the corner would have brought even more shooters aboard, I'd imagine.

+1 about the negligible increase in size for the built in evf, but otherwise i mostly disagree with spyro. for my pockets the height dimension is very important, and bringing the rx1 up to the height of the x100 or m would drastically reduce portability. also, the fact that the body is so small makes the lens look like it sticks out farther than it does, it's still thinner than an m9+35mm cron.

Nov 23, 2012 at 03:40 AM

Spyro P.
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #14 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

michaelwatkins wrote:Night time autofocus demonstration: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKCXtvwi-D0
that seemed pretty cr@p to be honest, with the AF illuminator on and still failing to lock
(2nd half of the video)

Nov 23, 2012 at 04:19 AM

michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #15 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

douglasf13 wrote:
What kind of grander vision? If this camera was the size of a DSLR, I don't think it would be compelling.

Hmnn, you got me there perhaps.

But to be fair, I think their overall objective was to make a statement not just about size and sensor size but to make a camera that would be seen as something of a classic and not just because it was first. Making it small doesn't appear to be the only objective, just one of the most visible.

Is it a classic? Enduring?

If reports are to be believed, they made this one very robustly - a camera to last and take a daily beating.

They seem to have taken cues from the feedback of (presumably) more advanced camera users and came out with a more refined system over the NEX; improved menus; better manual focus control; depth scales. It has their latest EVF (like the NEX-6); two and one-half out of three traditional controls (aperture and exposure compensation, and 1/2 points for shutter speed dial, unmarked and not on top).

The NEX-7 was more than just a 24MP sensor packed into a NEX-5N body and likewise this is more than a full frame sensor packed into a -7-ish body.

Did Fujifilm set out to design a cult-classic? Or did it happen by accident? Is Sony trying the same and will they be as successful?

I do think their primary objective was to design a camera that didn't need to be refreshed for a few years. Small just happened to be one of a laundry list of design points the end product had to meet.

I agree with what Spyro says, though. Making the camera slightly larger to accommodate a built-in EVF wouldn't likely affect its packability and carry convenience, but Sony stated (somewhere) that making it as small as possible was the goal. I understand that, in terms of bragging rights, but sticking the NEX-6 EVF in the corner would have brought even more shooters aboard, I'd imagine.

Probably.

I seem to recall a native-born Japanese talking about size sometime over the past year; if I can find the comment I'll link it in, but what I recall of the discussion left me with the impression that once the Japanese camera buyer decides they don't want a big DSLR, small, small as possible, is attractive. Perhaps there's something in this - tuning the design for the home market?

Dunno. Definitely I'd still be buying the camera if it had a built in EVF and probably I'd be even happier about it. Provided the camera didn't get too much deeper, I'd be willing to carry something X-E1 sized (body, not lens).

But at the same time, an external EVF doesn't turn me off like it used to. The one problem with the all-black EVF - it won't look as striking if one were to copy your implementation of the -5N's Hassified EVF!

Nov 23, 2012 at 05:05 AM

michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #16 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

Spyro P. wrote:
michaelwatkins wrote:Night time autofocus demonstration: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKCXtvwi-D0
that seemed pretty cr@p to be honest, with the AF illuminator on and still failing to lock
(2nd half of the video)

The only similar camera I have used with which to compare to is the X100 and it would often perform worse in the middle of the day.

Maybe my expectations are lower based on the X100, NEX-5N, but I didn't think it was all that bad for shooting in the dark.

Nov 23, 2012 at 05:11 AM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #17 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

sebboh wrote:
douglasf13 wrote:
I agree with what Spyro says, though. Making the camera slightly larger to accommodate a built-in EVF wouldn't likely affect its packability and carry convenience, but Sony stated (somewhere) that making it as small as possible was the goal. I understand that, in terms of bragging rights, but sticking the NEX-6 EVF in the corner would have brought even more shooters aboard, I'd imagine.

+1 about the negligible increase in size for the built in evf, but otherwise i mostly disagree with spyro. for my pockets the height dimension is very important, and bringing the rx1 up to the height of the x100 or m would drastically reduce portability. also, the fact that the body is so small makes the lens look like it sticks out farther than it does, it's still thinner than an m9+35mm cron.

Yeah, at that point, we really start getting into the nitty gritty of each of our unique carrying styles. Since I tend to carry my camera around everywhere on a strap across my body, depth is a more important dimension to me than width or height (although the latter still need to be within reason,) because I don't like the lens banging around on my arm and whatnot, and I like it to all sit close to my body. That's partially why I prefer an older 35 Summicron and a collapsable 50 Summicron for the M9, compared to the newer iterations. With the 35 Summicron IV, the M9 is around the same depth as the RX1 (maybe slightly thinner, depending on where you line the bodies up.)

I don't need super tiny, but DSLR big and thick is too big the other direction. The RX1 is a cool proof of concept for going really small, but I'd rather something a little larger with an EVF.

Nov 23, 2012 at 05:48 AM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #18 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

michaelwatkins wrote:
douglasf13 wrote:
What kind of grander vision? If this camera was the size of a DSLR, I don't think it would be compelling.

Hmnn, you got me there perhaps.

But to be fair, I think their overall objective was to make a statement not just about size and sensor size but to make a camera that would be seen as something of a classic and not just because it was first. Making it small doesn't appear to be the only objective, just one of the most visible.

Is it a classic? Enduring?

If reports are to be believed, they made this one very robustly - a camera to last and take a daily beating.

They seem to have taken cues from the feedback of (presumably) more advanced camera users and came out with a more refined system over the NEX; improved menus; better manual focus control; depth scales. It has their latest EVF (like the NEX-6); two and one-half out of three traditional controls (aperture and exposure compensation, and 1/2 points for shutter speed dial, unmarked and not on top).

The NEX-7 was more than just a 24MP sensor packed into a NEX-5N body and likewise this is more than a full frame sensor packed into a -7-ish body.

Did Fujifilm set out to design a cult-classic? Or did it happen by accident? Is Sony trying the same and will they be as successful?

I do think their primary objective was to design a camera that didn't need to be refreshed for a few years. Small just happened to be one of a laundry list of design points the end product had to meet.

I agree with what Spyro says, though. Making the camera slightly larger to accommodate a built-in EVF wouldn't likely affect its packability and carry convenience, but Sony stated (somewhere) that making it as small as possible was the goal. I understand that, in terms of bragging rights, but sticking the NEX-6 EVF in the corner would have brought even more shooters aboard, I'd imagine.

Probably.

I seem to recall a native-born Japanese talking about size sometime over the past year; if I can find the comment I'll link it in, but what I recall of the discussion left me with the impression that once the Japanese camera buyer decides they don't want a big DSLR, small, small as possible, is attractive. Perhaps there's something in this - tuning the design for the home market?

Dunno. Definitely I'd still be buying the camera if it had a built in EVF and probably I'd be even happier about it. Provided the camera didn't get too much deeper, I'd be willing to carry something X-E1 sized (body, not lens).

But at the same time, an external EVF doesn't turn me off like it used to. The one problem with the all-black EVF - it won't look as striking if one were to copy your implementation of the -5N's Hassified EVF!

As I mentioned above, I think the RX1 is Sony's proof of concept in making the smallest fullframe camera that they could. I'm not sure there is really much about it that is classic or enduring, solid build or not. To me, it's just a cool camera that will likely have even cooler successors that we'll be clamoring over someday.

I'd bet that, for every RX1 sold, a built-in EVF version would sell many times that amount.

The external EVF on the 5N always bugged me, with my carrying style, but I can see it working for others. I was hoping that the guy who bought my Hassified 5N EVF would show up on the forums, but I never saw it again.

Nov 23, 2012 at 05:56 AM

michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.81 #19 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

I think you are right - they'd sell more RX1's to folks around here - that's for sure. No VF is the number one or two complaint read on-line, right after or before price. And, ignoring whining about interchangeable lenses, number four probably is "make it just like the X100/XPro hybrid finder". Not likely, not from Sony.

Maybe someone from Japan could chime in as to how the viewfinderless camera is received there.

It's possible I've mentioned this before but I've wondered if Sony took some of their design cues for the camera from the wants of certain Japanese street photographers of note, at least one of which I seem to recall uses the rear LCD for framing and shoots one handed, a lot. Maybe that would explain the fixation on small size, thumb grip (which apparently isn't useful unless shooting extended arm, or when carrying the camera).

Anyway... it's hard to tell what will become classic (in the minds of buyers) on day one. Day 365 maybe. Day 5 * 365 probably. Day 10 * 365 for sure.

Nov 23, 2012 at 06:28 AM

philber
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.81 #20 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

I always feel a bit left out when someone writes : I won't spend 3000$£/€ on this camera that I otherwise would loooooove, because...... and then quotes something "I don't like the menu structure", or "the button layout and functions don't do it for me", or "it is not simple enough for me".
All this about a camera that (1) is unlike any camera ever produced (very small fixed-lens full-frame digital), and (2) has not been released yet, so this opinion is purely theoretical.

Lest anyone feels targeted directly, my examples are purely ficticious, and any resemblance with actual facts or individuals would be wholly accidental...

But, that said, I don't know a single serious photographer that doesn't wish for, or have, a "smaller kit" to go alongside his "larger kit", unless he has already transferred over to the "small-is-beautiful" crowd.

So Sony decided to offer an envelope-pushing design to this market segment, which, if my limited experience is anything to go by, is large and affluent: people who want to take their camera everywhere, but still want IQ to be "right up there", as opposed to "almost up there".
With such a "different" positioning from anything else in the market, minor features will not matter IMHO. But, hey, that is just me. YMMV

Nov 23, 2012 at 07:52 AM

1 2 3 … 80 81 82 … 137 138 end
FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 80 81 82 … 137 138 end