«

Well, that came as a surprise, but it does explain the recent lull in
the production of new articles on dpreview.com:

"Last, and by no means least, we've also moved out of our London
office and relocated to our new office and studio in Seattle,
Washington, which has obviously caused a little disruption. But have
no fear, we've worked very hard to ensure the delay in publishing
reviews is kept to a bare minimum (some of the team is still working
in the UK during this staggered relocation). This is an exciting move
for dpreview.com, and will give us access to considerably better
resources and allow us to expand our content and add features, tools
and improvements to sections of the site that we know our users will
love."

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10102021sitenews.asp

I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews.

On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 20:27:32 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
<> wrote:

>
>"Bruce" <> wrote in message
>news:.. .
>> Well, that came as a surprise, but it does explain the recent lull in
>> the production of new articles on dpreview.com:
>>
>> "Last, and by no means least, we've also moved out of our London
>> office and relocated to our new office and studio in Seattle,
>> Washington, which has obviously caused a little disruption. But have
>> no fear, we've worked very hard to ensure the delay in publishing
>> reviews is kept to a bare minimum (some of the team is still working
>> in the UK during this staggered relocation). This is an exciting move
>> for dpreview.com, and will give us access to considerably better
>> resources and allow us to expand our content and add features, tools
>> and improvements to sections of the site that we know our users will
>> love."
>>
>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10102021sitenews.asp
>>
>> I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews.
>
>Bought out by Microsoft? (That's what happened to many of my friends from my
>generation (Comp. Sci. degree in '76) who had more energy than I and started
>companies.)

Amazon.

"John A." <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 20:27:32 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
> <> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Bruce" <> wrote in message
>>news:. ..
>>> Well, that came as a surprise, but it does explain the recent lull in
>>> the production of new articles on dpreview.com:
>>>
>>> "Last, and by no means least, we've also moved out of our London
>>> office and relocated to our new office and studio in Seattle,
>>> Washington, which has obviously caused a little disruption. But have
>>> no fear, we've worked very hard to ensure the delay in publishing
>>> reviews is kept to a bare minimum (some of the team is still working
>>> in the UK during this staggered relocation). This is an exciting move
>>> for dpreview.com, and will give us access to considerably better
>>> resources and allow us to expand our content and add features, tools
>>> and improvements to sections of the site that we know our users will
>>> love."
>>>
>>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10102021sitenews.asp
>>>
>>> I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews.
>>
>>Bought out by Microsoft? (That's what happened to many of my friends from
>>my
>>generation (Comp. Sci. degree in '76) who had more energy than I and
>>started
>>companies.)
>
> Amazon.

Yep, Amazon acquired dpreveiw in May of 2007.

On Oct 21, 7:12*am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, that came as a surprise, but it does explain the recent lull in
> the production of new articles on dpreview.com:
>
> "Last, and by no means least, we've also moved out of our London
> office and relocated to our new office and studio in Seattle,
> Washington, which has obviously caused a little disruption. But have
> no fear, we've worked very hard to ensure the delay in publishing
> reviews is kept to a bare minimum (some of the team is still working
> in the UK during this staggered relocation). This is an exciting move
> for dpreview.com, and will give us access to considerably better
> resources and allow us to expand our content and add features, tools
> and improvements to sections of the site that we know our users will
> love."
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10102021sitenews.asp
>
> I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews. *

Watch the reviews shift from reasonable (despite some language issues)
to sleazy, like American print magazines.

On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 05:35:43 -0700 (PDT), Rich <>
wrote:

>On Oct 21, 7:12*am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Well, that came as a surprise, but it does explain the recent lull in
>> the production of new articles on dpreview.com:
>>
>> "Last, and by no means least, we've also moved out of our London
>> office and relocated to our new office and studio in Seattle,
>> Washington, which has obviously caused a little disruption. But have
>> no fear, we've worked very hard to ensure the delay in publishing
>> reviews is kept to a bare minimum (some of the team is still working
>> in the UK during this staggered relocation). This is an exciting move
>> for dpreview.com, and will give us access to considerably better
>> resources and allow us to expand our content and add features, tools
>> and improvements to sections of the site that we know our users will
>> love."
>>
>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10102021sitenews.asp
>>
>> I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews. *
>
>Watch the reviews shift from reasonable (despite some language issues)
>to sleazy, like American print magazines.

And no more girls on page 3.html.

In article <>, Bruce
<> wrote:

> I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews.

But you'll get lots of images of our gray skies and rain...

On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 08:14:53 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
<> wrote:

>On 21 Oct, 12:12, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Well, that came as a surprise, but it does explain the recent lull in
>> the production of new articles on dpreview.com:
>>
>> "Last, and by no means least, we've also moved out of our London
>> office and relocated to our new office and studio in Seattle,
>> Washington, which has obviously caused a little disruption. But have
>> no fear, we've worked very hard to ensure the delay in publishing
>> reviews is kept to a bare minimum (some of the team is still working
>> in the UK during this staggered relocation). This is an exciting move
>> for dpreview.com, and will give us access to considerably better
>> resources and allow us to expand our content and add features, tools
>> and improvements to sections of the site that we know our users will
>> love."
>
>You won;t be measuring camera weights in pounds and/or ounces will
>you.....
>I mean the states seems to be one of the very few places in the world
>that still uses
>ye olde imperial units, I do hope focal lengths won;t be expressed in
>inches
>
>But I've often wondered whether exposure times would be better
>expressed in ms
>rather than fractions of a second.......
>
>
>
>>
>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10102021sitenews.asp
>>
>> I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews. *

Units should be expressed in the terms the readership is most familiar
with and not determined by where the magazine is published.

The best way to express measurements is: 6"/152mm.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On 10/21/10 PDT 8:14 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:

>
> But I've often wondered whether exposure times would be better
> expressed in ms
> rather than fractions of a second.......

Wonder no more: the answer is no; fractions more readily convey the
relationship of doubling/halving the light.

--
john mcwilliams

On Oct 21, 9:12*am, John A. <j...@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 05:35:43 -0700 (PDT), Rich <rander3...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Oct 21, 7:12*am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Well, that came as a surprise, but it does explain the recent lull in
> >> the production of new articles on dpreview.com:
>
> >> "Last, and by no means least, we've also moved out of our London
> >> office and relocated to our new office and studio in Seattle,
> >> Washington, which has obviously caused a little disruption. But have
> >> no fear, we've worked very hard to ensure the delay in publishing
> >> reviews is kept to a bare minimum (some of the team is still working
> >> in the UK during this staggered relocation). This is an exciting move
> >> for dpreview.com, and will give us access to considerably better
> >> resources and allow us to expand our content and add features, tools
> >> and improvements to sections of the site that we know our users will
> >> love."
>
> >>http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10102021sitenews.asp
>
> >> I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews. *
>
> >Watch the reviews shift from reasonable (despite some language issues)
> >to sleazy, like American print magazines.
>
> And no more girls on page 3.html.

Because Jesus wouldn't like it.

On Oct 21, 1:23*pm, "David J. Littleboy" <davi...@gol.com> wrote:
> "John McWilliams" <jp...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:i9psg4$r7f$...
>
> > On 10/21/10 * PDT 8:14 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:
>
> >> But I've often wondered whether exposure times would be better
> >> expressed in ms
> >> rather than fractions of a second.......
>
> > Wonder no more: the answer is no; fractions more readily convey the
> > relationship of doubling/halving the light.
>
> So don't use decimal. 1 ms, 10 ms, 100 ms. It's perfectly obvious they're a
> stop apart.
>
> --
> David J. Littleboy
> Tokyo, Japan

Lets go back to measuring lenses in inches. If you want to take
American measurement Luddism to its (il)logical conclusion.