----- Original Message ----- From: "Eclipse Agency" Subject: RE: OK, which camera? : Hey glad you like your Sony too. I was afraid to post about it here since : it's not really considered by most photo snobs (generally speaking not those : here) to be a pro camera. re the 828, it's funny. It's not a TLR, rangefinder, viewcamera or anything other than a reflex camera but people don't like to call it an SLR (btw, are ANY of these configurations non-pro?). It's lenses are Zeis T* but they're deemed just 'ok'. Its a titanium and magnesium but it's viewed as too 'cheap' to be pro. It manages to reproduce the removable prism on old 'pro' cameras by having an innovative body design. The digital camera dust dilema is overcome by sealing the whole lens & body together so THATS never an issue. It has dual memory slots, selectable not through menus but by a far more convenient external switch yet after all this - it's not seen as PRO. Sony make the Nikon sensors as well as sensors for a number of other companies and they seem to know exactly how to get the lowest noise and best overall image out of their own sensors but still no acknowledgement (!) How durable are they? well the older 515's were what the Graphics Department bought for their camera-illiterate students - all were still going strong 3 years after the purchase and THAT'S a record for cameras. mebbe it just doesn't look right whatever. Students used to borrow my personal f717 in preference to the D100's at college fairly often but they'd never consider buying one themselves - they always spent the $ on the Nikon then slap a sigma on the front. I bought the f717 over every other camera available at the time - my only regret? Not waiting for the 828 ;-) k
