Nikon hints at "New Concept" camera release, possibly this year

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Bruce, Jul 13, 2010.

  1. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    from Bloomberg:
    http://preview.tinyurl.com/2325p8f
    or:
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-...camera-as-early-as-this-year-kimura-says.html


    START QUOTE

    Nikon Corp. plans to introduce a new type of single-lens reflex camera
    as early as this fiscal year, President Makoto Kimura said.

    The “new concept” model will probably have an enhanced function for
    video recording and may adopt the so-called mirrorless structure,
    Kimura said in an interview today in Tokyo. “It could be any time this
    fiscal year or the following year, as new models are starting to
    sell,” he said, declining to specify when the product will be
    available.

    Nikon, Japan’s biggest SLR camera maker, has been intensively focusing
    on development of the product to fuel revenue growth of digital SLR
    cameras, Kimura said. The company aims to boost sales of cameras with
    interchangeable lenses about 80 percent to 6.65 million units in three
    years to March 2013, Nikon said last month.

    In April, Panasonic Corp. started selling a new model of mirrorless
    camera, lightweight models that don’t have the mirror used in
    conventional SLR cameras that allows the user to see the same image in
    the viewfinder as the lens captures. Sony Corp. introduced a similar
    model last month.

    Sales in Japan of cameras with interchangeable lenses rose 35 percent
    in unit terms and 26 percent by value in May, partly because of the
    introduction of the news models, according to electronics research
    firm BCN Inc. in Tokyo.

    END QUOTE


    For the rest of the article, go to the link at the top of this
    message.
    Bruce, Jul 13, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Bruce

    ray Guest

    On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:57:00 +0100, Bruce wrote:

    > from Bloomberg:
    > http://preview.tinyurl.com/2325p8f
    > or:
    > http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-08/nikon-plans-new-concept-slr-

    camera-as-early-as-this-year-kimura-says.html
    >
    >
    > START QUOTE
    >
    > Nikon Corp. plans to introduce a new type of single-lens reflex camera
    > as early as this fiscal year, President Makoto Kimura said.
    >
    > The “new concept” model will probably have an enhanced function for
    > video recording and may adopt the so-called mirrorless structure, Kimura
    > said in an interview today in Tokyo. “It could be any time this fiscal
    > year or the following year, as new models are starting to sell,” he
    > said, declining to specify when the product will be available.
    >
    > Nikon, JapanÂ’s biggest SLR camera maker, has been intensively focusing
    > on development of the product to fuel revenue growth of digital SLR
    > cameras, Kimura said. The company aims to boost sales of cameras with
    > interchangeable lenses about 80 percent to 6.65 million units in three
    > years to March 2013, Nikon said last month.
    >
    > In April, Panasonic Corp. started selling a new model of mirrorless
    > camera, lightweight models that donÂ’t have the mirror used in
    > conventional SLR cameras that allows the user to see the same image in
    > the viewfinder as the lens captures. Sony Corp. introduced a similar
    > model last month.
    >
    > Sales in Japan of cameras with interchangeable lenses rose 35 percent in
    > unit terms and 26 percent by value in May, partly because of the
    > introduction of the news models, according to electronics research firm
    > BCN Inc. in Tokyo.
    >
    > END QUOTE
    >
    >
    > For the rest of the article, go to the link at the top of this message.


    Doesn't 'reflex' imply the use of the mirror? Perhaps better terminology
    would be "interchangeable lens EVF camera" or ILEVF.
    ray, Jul 13, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. ray wrote:
    > On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:57:00 +0100, Bruce wrote:
    >
    >
    >>from Bloomberg:
    >>http://preview.tinyurl.com/2325p8f
    >>or:
    >>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-08/nikon-plans-new-concept-slr-

    >
    > camera-as-early-as-this-year-kimura-says.html
    >
    >>
    >>START QUOTE
    >>
    >>Nikon Corp. plans to introduce a new type of single-lens reflex camera
    >>as early as this fiscal year, President Makoto Kimura said.
    >>
    >>The “new concept” model will probably have an enhanced function for
    >>video recording and may adopt the so-called mirrorless structure, Kimura
    >>said in an interview today in Tokyo. “It could be any time this fiscal
    >>year or the following year, as new models are starting to sell,” he
    >>said, declining to specify when the product will be available.
    >>
    >>Nikon, JapanÂ’s biggest SLR camera maker, has been intensively focusing
    >>on development of the product to fuel revenue growth of digital SLR
    >>cameras, Kimura said. The company aims to boost sales of cameras with
    >>interchangeable lenses about 80 percent to 6.65 million units in three
    >>years to March 2013, Nikon said last month.
    >>
    >>In April, Panasonic Corp. started selling a new model of mirrorless
    >>camera, lightweight models that donÂ’t have the mirror used in
    >>conventional SLR cameras that allows the user to see the same image in
    >>the viewfinder as the lens captures. Sony Corp. introduced a similar
    >>model last month.
    >>
    >>Sales in Japan of cameras with interchangeable lenses rose 35 percent in
    >>unit terms and 26 percent by value in May, partly because of the
    >>introduction of the news models, according to electronics research firm
    >>BCN Inc. in Tokyo.
    >>
    >>END QUOTE
    >>
    >>
    >>For the rest of the article, go to the link at the top of this message.

    >
    >
    > Doesn't 'reflex' imply the use of the mirror? Perhaps better terminology
    > would be "interchangeable lens EVF camera" or ILEVF.


    Indeed. All the literature I saw regarding those camera types,
    beginning with the Olympus PEN cameras did not characterize them as SLR
    cameras. There are a variety of characterizations, however, the one I
    see used most frequently, as you assert, is interchangeable lens EVF.
    Although that does leave something to be desired. If the above was a
    press release, it would appear someone goofed.
    Alan Lichtenstein, Jul 13, 2010
    #3
  4. Rich wrote:
    > ray <> wrote in news::
    >
    >
    >>On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:57:00 +0100, Bruce wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>from Bloomberg:
    >>>http://preview.tinyurl.com/2325p8f

    >
    >
    >
    > Oops! All those Nikon owners who denigrated Panasonic and Olympus for
    > having produced consumer toy cameras (micro 4/3rds) will be eating crow
    > soon, much as they did with dust control systems. P.S. NIkon? The quality
    > of your less than D300 sensors (D90, D5000) is low (I know the "seconds"go
    > into those cameras and the top sensors go to the D300), most of them have
    > dead or hot pixels. Time to adopt Olympus's pixel-mapping function.


    Please explain the pixel-mapping function. Is it to be used for
    'preventative maintenance' or just if a problem is identified? The
    manual is less than satisfactory. As an Olympus owner, I never used
    this feature, because I had and have no problems.
    Alan Lichtenstein, Jul 13, 2010
    #4
  5. Bruce

    ray Guest

    On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:21:39 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein wrote:

    > ray wrote:
    >> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:57:00 +0100, Bruce wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>from Bloomberg:
    >>>http://preview.tinyurl.com/2325p8f
    >>>or:
    >>>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-08/nikon-plans-new-concept-slr-

    >>
    >> camera-as-early-as-this-year-kimura-says.html
    >>
    >>
    >>>START QUOTE
    >>>
    >>>Nikon Corp. plans to introduce a new type of single-lens reflex camera
    >>>as early as this fiscal year, President Makoto Kimura said.
    >>>
    >>>The “new concept” model will probably have an enhanced function for
    >>>video recording and may adopt the so-called mirrorless structure,
    >>>Kimura said in an interview today in Tokyo. “It could be any time this
    >>>fiscal year or the following year, as new models are starting to

    sell,”
    >>>he said, declining to specify when the product will be available.
    >>>
    >>>Nikon, JapanÂ’s biggest SLR camera maker, has been intensively focusing
    >>>on development of the product to fuel revenue growth of digital SLR
    >>>cameras, Kimura said. The company aims to boost sales of cameras with
    >>>interchangeable lenses about 80 percent to 6.65 million units in three
    >>>years to March 2013, Nikon said last month.
    >>>
    >>>In April, Panasonic Corp. started selling a new model of mirrorless
    >>>camera, lightweight models that donÂ’t have the mirror used in
    >>>conventional SLR cameras that allows the user to see the same image in
    >>>the viewfinder as the lens captures. Sony Corp. introduced a similar
    >>>model last month.
    >>>
    >>>Sales in Japan of cameras with interchangeable lenses rose 35 percent
    >>>in unit terms and 26 percent by value in May, partly because of the
    >>>introduction of the news models, according to electronics research firm
    >>>BCN Inc. in Tokyo.
    >>>
    >>>END QUOTE
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>For the rest of the article, go to the link at the top of this message.

    >>
    >>
    >> Doesn't 'reflex' imply the use of the mirror? Perhaps better
    >> terminology would be "interchangeable lens EVF camera" or ILEVF.

    >
    > Indeed. All the literature I saw regarding those camera types,
    > beginning with the Olympus PEN cameras did not characterize them as SLR
    > cameras. There are a variety of characterizations, however, the one I
    > see used most frequently, as you assert, is interchangeable lens EVF.
    > Although that does leave something to be desired. If the above was a
    > press release, it would appear someone goofed.


    BTW - I like the concept. I've experienced an EVF with decent resolution
    - it's very nice. That's probably as close to WYSIWYG as we'll ever come.
    Most applications could better be termed 'what you get is no surprise'.
    ray, Jul 13, 2010
    #5
  6. Bruce

    Better Info Guest

    On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:21:39 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein <>
    wrote:

    >ray wrote:
    >> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:57:00 +0100, Bruce wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>from Bloomberg:
    >>>http://preview.tinyurl.com/2325p8f
    >>>or:
    >>>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-08/nikon-plans-new-concept-slr-

    >>
    >> camera-as-early-as-this-year-kimura-says.html
    >>
    >>>
    >>>START QUOTE
    >>>
    >>>Nikon Corp. plans to introduce a new type of single-lens reflex camera
    >>>as early as this fiscal year, President Makoto Kimura said.
    >>>
    >>>The ?new concept? model will probably have an enhanced function for
    >>>video recording and may adopt the so-called mirrorless structure, Kimura
    >>>said in an interview today in Tokyo. ?It could be any time this fiscal
    >>>year or the following year, as new models are starting to sell,? he
    >>>said, declining to specify when the product will be available.
    >>>
    >>>Nikon, Japan?s biggest SLR camera maker, has been intensively focusing
    >>>on development of the product to fuel revenue growth of digital SLR
    >>>cameras, Kimura said. The company aims to boost sales of cameras with
    >>>interchangeable lenses about 80 percent to 6.65 million units in three
    >>>years to March 2013, Nikon said last month.
    >>>
    >>>In April, Panasonic Corp. started selling a new model of mirrorless
    >>>camera, lightweight models that don?t have the mirror used in
    >>>conventional SLR cameras that allows the user to see the same image in
    >>>the viewfinder as the lens captures. Sony Corp. introduced a similar
    >>>model last month.
    >>>
    >>>Sales in Japan of cameras with interchangeable lenses rose 35 percent in
    >>>unit terms and 26 percent by value in May, partly because of the
    >>>introduction of the news models, according to electronics research firm
    >>>BCN Inc. in Tokyo.
    >>>
    >>>END QUOTE
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>For the rest of the article, go to the link at the top of this message.

    >>
    >>
    >> Doesn't 'reflex' imply the use of the mirror? Perhaps better terminology
    >> would be "interchangeable lens EVF camera" or ILEVF.

    >
    >Indeed. All the literature I saw regarding those camera types,
    >beginning with the Olympus PEN cameras did not characterize them as SLR
    >cameras. There are a variety of characterizations, however, the one I
    >see used most frequently, as you assert, is interchangeable lens EVF.
    >Although that does leave something to be desired. If the above was a
    >press release, it would appear someone goofed.



    1re•flex \"re-'fleks\ noun [L reflexus, pp. of reflectere to reflect]
    (1508)
    ** 1 a : reflected heat, light, or color
    b : a mirrored image
    ** c : a copy exact in essential or peculiar features
    ** 2 a : an automatic and often inborn response to a stimulus that
    involves a nerve impulse passing inward from a receptor to a nerve center
    and thence outward to an effector (as a muscle or gland) without reaching
    the level of consciousness — compare habit
    ** b : the process that culminates in a reflex and comprises reception,
    transmission, and reaction — called also reflex action
    ** c pl : the power of acting or responding with adequate speed
    d : a way of thinking or behaving
    3 : a linguistic element (as a word or sound) or system (as writing)
    that is derived from a prior and esp. an older element or system <boat is
    the reflex of Old English bat>

    2reflex adjective [L reflexus] (1649)
    1 : directed back on the mind or its operations : introspective
    ** 2 : bent, turned, or directed back : reflected <a stem with reflex
    leaves>
    ** 3 : produced or carried out in reaction, resistance, or return
    4 of an angle : being between 180° and 360°
    ** 5 : of, relating to, or produced by a reflex without intervention of
    consciousness
    re•flex•ly adverb

    (C)1996 Zane Publishing, Inc. and Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. All
    rights reserved.

    ** = applies to a sensor signal reflexed to an LCD or EVF display


    Now kindly crawl back into your pretend-photographer's troll-hole.
    Better Info, Jul 13, 2010
    #6
  7. Bruce

    Rich Guest

    On Jul 13, 5:34 pm, Alan Lichtenstein <> wrote:
    > Rich wrote:
    > > ray <> wrote innews::

    >
    > >>On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:57:00 +0100, Bruce wrote:

    >
    > >>>from Bloomberg:
    > >>>http://preview.tinyurl.com/2325p8f

    >
    > > Oops!  All those Nikon owners who denigrated Panasonic and Olympus for
    > > having produced consumer toy cameras (micro 4/3rds) will be eating crow
    > > soon, much as they did with dust control systems.  P.S. NIkon? The quality
    > > of your less than D300 sensors (D90, D5000) is low (I know the "seconds"go
    > > into those cameras and the top sensors go to the D300), most of them have
    > > dead or hot pixels.  Time to adopt Olympus's pixel-mapping function.

    >
    > Please explain the pixel-mapping function.  Is it to be used for
    > 'preventative maintenance' or just if a problem is identified?  The
    > manual is less than satisfactory.  As an Olympus owner, I never used
    > this feature, because I had and have no problems.


    If a hot (or dead) pixel appears (a pixel whose response rate differs
    significantly from its neighbours) you can "map" the image of the
    adjacent pixel over the bad one, thereby eliminating it from the
    image. Kind of like how long exposure dark framing is used to
    eliminate hot pixels. I never had to use it on an Olympus either, but
    it would have come in handy with a few Nikon's I've seen.
    Rich, Jul 14, 2010
    #7
  8. ray wrote:
    > On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:21:39 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein wrote:
    >
    >
    >>ray wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:57:00 +0100, Bruce wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>from Bloomberg:
    >>>
    >>>>http://preview.tinyurl.com/2325p8f
    >>>>or:
    >>>>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-08/nikon-plans-new-concept-slr-
    >>>
    >>>camera-as-early-as-this-year-kimura-says.html
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>START QUOTE
    >>>>
    >>>>Nikon Corp. plans to introduce a new type of single-lens reflex camera
    >>>>as early as this fiscal year, President Makoto Kimura said.
    >>>>
    >>>>The “new concept” model will probably have an enhanced function for
    >>>>video recording and may adopt the so-called mirrorless structure,
    >>>>Kimura said in an interview today in Tokyo. “It could be any time this
    >>>>fiscal year or the following year, as new models are starting to

    >
    > sell,”
    >
    >>>>he said, declining to specify when the product will be available.
    >>>>
    >>>>Nikon, JapanÂ’s biggest SLR camera maker, has been intensively focusing
    >>>>on development of the product to fuel revenue growth of digital SLR
    >>>>cameras, Kimura said. The company aims to boost sales of cameras with
    >>>>interchangeable lenses about 80 percent to 6.65 million units in three
    >>>>years to March 2013, Nikon said last month.
    >>>>
    >>>>In April, Panasonic Corp. started selling a new model of mirrorless
    >>>>camera, lightweight models that donÂ’t have the mirror used in
    >>>>conventional SLR cameras that allows the user to see the same image in
    >>>>the viewfinder as the lens captures. Sony Corp. introduced a similar
    >>>>model last month.
    >>>>
    >>>>Sales in Japan of cameras with interchangeable lenses rose 35 percent
    >>>>in unit terms and 26 percent by value in May, partly because of the
    >>>>introduction of the news models, according to electronics research firm
    >>>>BCN Inc. in Tokyo.
    >>>>
    >>>>END QUOTE
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>For the rest of the article, go to the link at the top of this message.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Doesn't 'reflex' imply the use of the mirror? Perhaps better
    >>>terminology would be "interchangeable lens EVF camera" or ILEVF.

    >>
    >>Indeed. All the literature I saw regarding those camera types,
    >>beginning with the Olympus PEN cameras did not characterize them as SLR
    >>cameras. There are a variety of characterizations, however, the one I
    >>see used most frequently, as you assert, is interchangeable lens EVF.
    >>Although that does leave something to be desired. If the above was a
    >>press release, it would appear someone goofed.

    >
    >
    > BTW - I like the concept. I've experienced an EVF with decent resolution
    > - it's very nice. That's probably as close to WYSIWYG as we'll ever come.
    > Most applications could better be termed 'what you get is no surprise'.
    >

    I haven't held one of them. I guess as far as the concept is concerned,
    I would suppose that all the companies have done their due diligence and
    appropriate market research.
    Alan Lichtenstein, Jul 14, 2010
    #8
  9. Rich wrote:

    > On Jul 13, 5:34 pm, Alan Lichtenstein <> wrote:
    >
    >>Rich wrote:
    >>
    >>>ray <> wrote innews::

    >>
    >>>>On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:57:00 +0100, Bruce wrote:

    >>
    >>>>>from Bloomberg:
    >>>>
    >>>>>http://preview.tinyurl.com/2325p8f

    >>
    >>>Oops! All those Nikon owners who denigrated Panasonic and Olympus for
    >>>having produced consumer toy cameras (micro 4/3rds) will be eating crow
    >>>soon, much as they did with dust control systems. P.S. NIkon? The quality
    >>>of your less than D300 sensors (D90, D5000) is low (I know the "seconds"go
    >>>into those cameras and the top sensors go to the D300), most of them have
    >>>dead or hot pixels. Time to adopt Olympus's pixel-mapping function.

    >>
    >>Please explain the pixel-mapping function. Is it to be used for
    >>'preventative maintenance' or just if a problem is identified? The
    >>manual is less than satisfactory. As an Olympus owner, I never used
    >>this feature, because I had and have no problems.

    >
    >
    > If a hot (or dead) pixel appears (a pixel whose response rate differs
    > significantly from its neighbours) you can "map" the image of the
    > adjacent pixel over the bad one, thereby eliminating it from the
    > image. Kind of like how long exposure dark framing is used to
    > eliminate hot pixels. I never had to use it on an Olympus either, but
    > it would have come in handy with a few Nikon's I've seen.


    So IOW, if I don't detect any problem, then don't use the function?
    Because I've never used it either. The manual does state to do it
    periodically, once a year to be precise. the manual states that the
    function allows the camera to check and adjust the CCD and image
    processing functions. I've been pretty much a disciple of 'if it ain't
    broke, don't fix it.' That's what I inferred pixel mapping to be.
    Alan Lichtenstein, Jul 14, 2010
    #9
  10. Bruce

    ray Guest

    On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 21:05:03 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein wrote:

    > ray wrote:
    >> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:21:39 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>ray wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:57:00 +0100, Bruce wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>from Bloomberg:
    >>>>
    >>>>>http://preview.tinyurl.com/2325p8f
    >>>>>or:
    >>>>>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-08/nikon-plans-new-concept-slr-
    >>>>
    >>>>camera-as-early-as-this-year-kimura-says.html
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>START QUOTE
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Nikon Corp. plans to introduce a new type of single-lens reflex
    >>>>>camera as early as this fiscal year, President Makoto Kimura said.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>The “new concept” model will probably have an enhanced function for
    >>>>>video recording and may adopt the so-called mirrorless structure,
    >>>>>Kimura said in an interview today in Tokyo. “It could be any time
    >>>>>this fiscal year or the following year, as new models are starting to

    >>
    >> sell,”
    >>
    >>>>>he said, declining to specify when the product will be available.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Nikon, JapanÂ’s biggest SLR camera maker, has been intensively
    >>>>>focusing on development of the product to fuel revenue growth of
    >>>>>digital SLR cameras, Kimura said. The company aims to boost sales of
    >>>>>cameras with interchangeable lenses about 80 percent to 6.65 million
    >>>>>units in three years to March 2013, Nikon said last month.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>In April, Panasonic Corp. started selling a new model of mirrorless
    >>>>>camera, lightweight models that donÂ’t have the mirror used in
    >>>>>conventional SLR cameras that allows the user to see the same image
    >>>>>in the viewfinder as the lens captures. Sony Corp. introduced a
    >>>>>similar model last month.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Sales in Japan of cameras with interchangeable lenses rose 35 percent
    >>>>>in unit terms and 26 percent by value in May, partly because of the
    >>>>>introduction of the news models, according to electronics research
    >>>>>firm BCN Inc. in Tokyo.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>END QUOTE
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>For the rest of the article, go to the link at the top of this
    >>>>>message.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Doesn't 'reflex' imply the use of the mirror? Perhaps better
    >>>>terminology would be "interchangeable lens EVF camera" or ILEVF.
    >>>
    >>>Indeed. All the literature I saw regarding those camera types,
    >>>beginning with the Olympus PEN cameras did not characterize them as SLR
    >>>cameras. There are a variety of characterizations, however, the one I
    >>>see used most frequently, as you assert, is interchangeable lens EVF.
    >>>Although that does leave something to be desired. If the above was a
    >>>press release, it would appear someone goofed.

    >>
    >>
    >> BTW - I like the concept. I've experienced an EVF with decent
    >> resolution - it's very nice. That's probably as close to WYSIWYG as
    >> we'll ever come. Most applications could better be termed 'what you get
    >> is no surprise'.
    >>

    > I haven't held one of them. I guess as far as the concept is concerned,
    > I would suppose that all the companies have done their due diligence and
    > appropriate market research.


    I've not been in the market for a few years, but last time I checked
    there were some EVF's with adequate resolution and some that were so
    damned 'blocky' I could not stand to look through them - I would have had
    a lot of trouble trying to frame a shot with them. Minolta had one they
    billed as 1mp and the Kodak P series was somewhere over 300k - that
    worked. At that time, I think Canon and others were using something on
    the order of 180k - totally inadequate, IMHO.
    ray, Jul 14, 2010
    #10
  11. ray wrote:
    > On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 21:05:03 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein wrote:
    >
    >
    >>ray wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:21:39 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>ray wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:57:00 +0100, Bruce wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>from Bloomberg:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>http://preview.tinyurl.com/2325p8f
    >>>>>>or:
    >>>>>>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-08/nikon-plans-new-concept-slr-
    >>>>>
    >>>>>camera-as-early-as-this-year-kimura-says.html
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>START QUOTE
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Nikon Corp. plans to introduce a new type of single-lens reflex
    >>>>>>camera as early as this fiscal year, President Makoto Kimura said.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>The “new concept” model will probably have an enhanced function for
    >>>>>>video recording and may adopt the so-called mirrorless structure,
    >>>>>>Kimura said in an interview today in Tokyo. “It could be any time
    >>>>>>this fiscal year or the following year, as new models are starting to
    >>>
    >>>sell,”
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>he said, declining to specify when the product will be available.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Nikon, JapanÂ’s biggest SLR camera maker, has been intensively
    >>>>>>focusing on development of the product to fuel revenue growth of
    >>>>>>digital SLR cameras, Kimura said. The company aims to boost sales of
    >>>>>>cameras with interchangeable lenses about 80 percent to 6.65 million
    >>>>>>units in three years to March 2013, Nikon said last month.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>In April, Panasonic Corp. started selling a new model of mirrorless
    >>>>>>camera, lightweight models that donÂ’t have the mirror used in
    >>>>>>conventional SLR cameras that allows the user to see the same image
    >>>>>>in the viewfinder as the lens captures. Sony Corp. introduced a
    >>>>>>similar model last month.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Sales in Japan of cameras with interchangeable lenses rose 35 percent
    >>>>>>in unit terms and 26 percent by value in May, partly because of the
    >>>>>>introduction of the news models, according to electronics research
    >>>>>>firm BCN Inc. in Tokyo.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>END QUOTE
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>For the rest of the article, go to the link at the top of this
    >>>>>>message.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Doesn't 'reflex' imply the use of the mirror? Perhaps better
    >>>>>terminology would be "interchangeable lens EVF camera" or ILEVF.
    >>>>
    >>>>Indeed. All the literature I saw regarding those camera types,
    >>>>beginning with the Olympus PEN cameras did not characterize them as SLR
    >>>>cameras. There are a variety of characterizations, however, the one I
    >>>>see used most frequently, as you assert, is interchangeable lens EVF.
    >>>>Although that does leave something to be desired. If the above was a
    >>>>press release, it would appear someone goofed.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>BTW - I like the concept. I've experienced an EVF with decent
    >>>resolution - it's very nice. That's probably as close to WYSIWYG as
    >>>we'll ever come. Most applications could better be termed 'what you get
    >>>is no surprise'.
    >>>

    >>
    >>I haven't held one of them. I guess as far as the concept is concerned,
    >>I would suppose that all the companies have done their due diligence and
    >>appropriate market research.

    >
    >
    > I've not been in the market for a few years, but last time I checked
    > there were some EVF's with adequate resolution and some that were so
    > damned 'blocky' I could not stand to look through them - I would have had
    > a lot of trouble trying to frame a shot with them. Minolta had one they
    > billed as 1mp and the Kodak P series was somewhere over 300k - that
    > worked. At that time, I think Canon and others were using something on
    > the order of 180k - totally inadequate, IMHO.


    As I said, never having used one, I'm at a loss to reply any further,
    especially since I have no familiarity with the former generation. Not
    to be rude, of course.
    Alan Lichtenstein, Jul 14, 2010
    #11
  12. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:21:39 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein <>
    wrote:

    >Indeed. All the literature I saw regarding those camera types,
    >beginning with the Olympus PEN cameras did not characterize them as SLR
    >cameras. There are a variety of characterizations, however, the one I
    >see used most frequently, as you assert, is interchangeable lens EVF.
    >Although that does leave something to be desired. If the above was a
    >press release, it would appear someone goofed.



    It wasn't a press release. It was a Bloomberg article, as would have
    been obvious to anyone who read my posting and/or followed the link to
    the original article. Obviously you did neither of those things.
    Bruce, Jul 14, 2010
    #12
  13. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:09:06 -0700 (PDT), Rich <>
    wrote:
    >On Jul 13, 5:34 pm, Alan Lichtenstein <> wrote:
    >>
    >> Please explain the pixel-mapping function.  Is it to be used for
    >> 'preventative maintenance' or just if a problem is identified?  The
    >> manual is less than satisfactory.  As an Olympus owner, I never used
    >> this feature, because I had and have no problems.

    >
    >If a hot (or dead) pixel appears (a pixel whose response rate differs
    >significantly from its neighbours) you can "map" the image of the
    >adjacent pixel over the bad one, thereby eliminating it from the
    >image. Kind of like how long exposure dark framing is used to
    >eliminate hot pixels. I never had to use it on an Olympus either, but
    >it would have come in handy with a few Nikon's I've seen.



    It was useful on the Olympus E-20 DSLR which seemed particularly prone
    to hot pixels - more so than any Nikon DSLR, I suspect.
    Bruce, Jul 14, 2010
    #13
  14. Bruce

    Better Info Guest

    On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:50:15 +0100, Bruce <> wrote:

    >On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:09:06 -0700 (PDT), Rich <>
    >wrote:
    >>On Jul 13, 5:34 pm, Alan Lichtenstein <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Please explain the pixel-mapping function.  Is it to be used for
    >>> 'preventative maintenance' or just if a problem is identified?  The
    >>> manual is less than satisfactory.  As an Olympus owner, I never used
    >>> this feature, because I had and have no problems.

    >>
    >>If a hot (or dead) pixel appears (a pixel whose response rate differs
    >>significantly from its neighbours) you can "map" the image of the
    >>adjacent pixel over the bad one, thereby eliminating it from the
    >>image. Kind of like how long exposure dark framing is used to
    >>eliminate hot pixels. I never had to use it on an Olympus either, but
    >>it would have come in handy with a few Nikon's I've seen.

    >
    >
    >It was useful on the Olympus E-20 DSLR which seemed particularly prone
    >to hot pixels - more so than any Nikon DSLR, I suspect.


    EVERY sensor is prone to hot and dead pixels. Just because you don't have
    access to mapping them out or know about them doesn't mean that they don't
    exists.

    On average, there's at least 2,000 to 15,000 dead or hot pixels on every
    sensor of every size by every manufacturer. This has been found by the
    "badpixel.lua" script for CHDK cameras. (Through 3 years of sensors from
    various providers.). That LUA script required to run before using CHDK's
    DNG output format. CHDK has to find all the bad-pixels that the cameras
    already knows about before it can convert the RAW sensor data to a DNG
    format.

    If your sensor is reporting ZERO bad photosites someone is most certainly
    lying to you. EVERY sensor has them, to varying degrees, no matter how much
    money that you threw at your camera.
    Better Info, Jul 14, 2010
    #14
  15. Bruce wrote:
    > On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:21:39 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Indeed. All the literature I saw regarding those camera types,
    >>beginning with the Olympus PEN cameras did not characterize them as SLR
    >>cameras. There are a variety of characterizations, however, the one I
    >>see used most frequently, as you assert, is interchangeable lens EVF.
    >>Although that does leave something to be desired. If the above was a
    >>press release, it would appear someone goofed.

    >
    >
    >
    > It wasn't a press release. It was a Bloomberg article, as would have
    > been obvious to anyone who read my posting and/or followed the link to
    > the original article. Obviously you did neither of those things.
    >

    Reporters get their facts from the events they cover. The 'article' in
    question cites comments by Nikon's president, in an interview. That
    said, now unless you are going to assert that the reporter 'embellished'
    the facts by adding something that was NOT stated( i.e., inserting the
    term SLR when Nikon's president did NOT use it ), we have to believe
    that the term was used in the context of the interview.

    Since any interview by a company official, in this case, Nikon's
    president constitutes a dissemination of company policy, it can properly
    be termed a 'press release.'

    As far as your other comments are concerned, I think that the above
    explains my use of terminology. As far as your comment that 'obviously
    you did neither' is concerned, I would only caution you not to jump to
    conclusions before you go drawing conclusions which may not have the
    validity you seem to think they do. IOW, ask first before you make
    assumptions.
    Alan Lichtenstein, Jul 14, 2010
    #15
  16. Better Info wrote:

    > On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:50:15 +0100, Bruce <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:09:06 -0700 (PDT), Rich <>
    >>wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Jul 13, 5:34 pm, Alan Lichtenstein <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Please explain the pixel-mapping function. Is it to be used for
    >>>>'preventative maintenance' or just if a problem is identified? The
    >>>>manual is less than satisfactory. As an Olympus owner, I never used
    >>>>this feature, because I had and have no problems.
    >>>
    >>>If a hot (or dead) pixel appears (a pixel whose response rate differs
    >>>significantly from its neighbours) you can "map" the image of the
    >>>adjacent pixel over the bad one, thereby eliminating it from the
    >>>image. Kind of like how long exposure dark framing is used to
    >>>eliminate hot pixels. I never had to use it on an Olympus either, but
    >>>it would have come in handy with a few Nikon's I've seen.

    >>
    >>
    >>It was useful on the Olympus E-20 DSLR which seemed particularly prone
    >>to hot pixels - more so than any Nikon DSLR, I suspect.

    >
    >
    > EVERY sensor is prone to hot and dead pixels. Just because you don't have
    > access to mapping them out or know about them doesn't mean that they don't
    > exists.
    >
    > On average, there's at least 2,000 to 15,000 dead or hot pixels on every
    > sensor of every size by every manufacturer. This has been found by the
    > "badpixel.lua" script for CHDK cameras. (Through 3 years of sensors from
    > various providers.). That LUA script required to run before using CHDK's
    > DNG output format. CHDK has to find all the bad-pixels that the cameras
    > already knows about before it can convert the RAW sensor data to a DNG
    > format.
    >
    > If your sensor is reporting ZERO bad photosites someone is most certainly
    > lying to you. EVERY sensor has them, to varying degrees, no matter how much
    > money that you threw at your camera.
    >

    Perhaps you can add something to my question. I have never used the
    pixel mapping function. The manufacturer suggests that it be used once
    a year. I cannot detect any 'bad pixels' optically, albeit that is a
    very crude and likely very imprecise function, but I see no evidence of
    any in photographs. Consequently, I have never used the function. Are
    you suggesting that I operate it as per the manufacturer's advice anyway?
    Alan Lichtenstein, Jul 14, 2010
    #16
  17. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 07:21:03 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein <>
    wrote:
    >Bruce wrote:
    >> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:21:39 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Indeed. All the literature I saw regarding those camera types,
    >>>beginning with the Olympus PEN cameras did not characterize them as SLR
    >>>cameras. There are a variety of characterizations, however, the one I
    >>>see used most frequently, as you assert, is interchangeable lens EVF.
    >>>Although that does leave something to be desired. If the above was a
    >>>press release, it would appear someone goofed.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> It wasn't a press release. It was a Bloomberg article, as would have
    >> been obvious to anyone who read my posting and/or followed the link to
    >> the original article. Obviously you did neither of those things.
    >>

    >Reporters get their facts from the events they cover. The 'article' in
    >question cites comments by Nikon's president, in an interview. That
    >said, now unless you are going to assert that the reporter 'embellished'
    >the facts by adding something that was NOT stated( i.e., inserting the
    >term SLR when Nikon's president did NOT use it ), we have to believe
    >that the term was used in the context of the interview.
    >
    >Since any interview by a company official, in this case, Nikon's
    >president constitutes a dissemination of company policy, it can properly
    >be termed a 'press release.'
    >
    >As far as your other comments are concerned, I think that the above
    >explains my use of terminology. As far as your comment that 'obviously
    >you did neither' is concerned, I would only caution you not to jump to
    >conclusions before you go drawing conclusions which may not have the
    >validity you seem to think they do. IOW, ask first before you make
    >assumptions.



    You have worked *very hard* to earn a place in my kill file.

    So, congratulations!
    Bruce, Jul 14, 2010
    #17
  18. Bruce wrote:
    > On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 07:21:03 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Bruce wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:21:39 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein <>
    >>>wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Indeed. All the literature I saw regarding those camera types,
    >>>>beginning with the Olympus PEN cameras did not characterize them as SLR
    >>>>cameras. There are a variety of characterizations, however, the one I
    >>>>see used most frequently, as you assert, is interchangeable lens EVF.
    >>>>Although that does leave something to be desired. If the above was a
    >>>>press release, it would appear someone goofed.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>It wasn't a press release. It was a Bloomberg article, as would have
    >>>been obvious to anyone who read my posting and/or followed the link to
    >>>the original article. Obviously you did neither of those things.
    >>>

    >>
    >>Reporters get their facts from the events they cover. The 'article' in
    >>question cites comments by Nikon's president, in an interview. That
    >>said, now unless you are going to assert that the reporter 'embellished'
    >>the facts by adding something that was NOT stated( i.e., inserting the
    >>term SLR when Nikon's president did NOT use it ), we have to believe
    >>that the term was used in the context of the interview.
    >>
    >>Since any interview by a company official, in this case, Nikon's
    >>president constitutes a dissemination of company policy, it can properly
    >>be termed a 'press release.'
    >>
    >>As far as your other comments are concerned, I think that the above
    >>explains my use of terminology. As far as your comment that 'obviously
    >>you did neither' is concerned, I would only caution you not to jump to
    >>conclusions before you go drawing conclusions which may not have the
    >>validity you seem to think they do. IOW, ask first before you make
    >>assumptions.

    >
    >
    >
    > You have worked *very hard* to earn a place in my kill file.
    >
    > So, congratulations!
    >

    Had you simply left your post of after stating that it wasn't a press
    release, but a Bloomberg article, that would have been sufficient to
    point out what may have been an error of omission or an assumption on my
    part. But that wasn't sufficient for you. You simply HAD to make it
    personal by adding the remainder of the phrases. And now you take
    umbrage at my clarifying what I wrote and why I write it, with the
    appropriate caution to you not to jump to additional conclusions.

    Picking up your ball and running home is hardly a mature way of dealing
    with a disagreement. I remind you it was YOU who began the nit-picking
    for whatever reason only you can know. Because your comments had no
    purpose, in the manner you asserted them EXCEPT to begin an exchange
    that you got.

    So, take your ball and run home. I could not care less if you don't
    reply to what I may post or ask. There are others who do not jump to
    personal attack, no matter how mild you may think it is. A more secure
    and mature person would simply not reply to an individual he/she wants
    no truck with. One wonders why you found it necessary to announce to
    the world that you had a need to kill file someone as opposed to the
    simple expedient of ignoring them.
    Alan Lichtenstein, Jul 14, 2010
    #18
  19. Bruce

    Peter Guest

    "Alan Lichtenstein" <> wrote in message
    news:4c3e0239$0$31264$...
    > Bruce wrote:
    >> On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 07:21:03 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Bruce wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:21:39 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein <>
    >>>>wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Indeed. All the literature I saw regarding those camera types,
    >>>>>beginning with the Olympus PEN cameras did not characterize them as SLR
    >>>>>cameras. There are a variety of characterizations, however, the one I
    >>>>>see used most frequently, as you assert, is interchangeable lens EVF.
    >>>>>Although that does leave something to be desired. If the above was a
    >>>>>press release, it would appear someone goofed.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>It wasn't a press release. It was a Bloomberg article, as would have
    >>>>been obvious to anyone who read my posting and/or followed the link to
    >>>>the original article. Obviously you did neither of those things.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>Reporters get their facts from the events they cover. The 'article' in
    >>>question cites comments by Nikon's president, in an interview. That
    >>>said, now unless you are going to assert that the reporter 'embellished'
    >>>the facts by adding something that was NOT stated( i.e., inserting the
    >>>term SLR when Nikon's president did NOT use it ), we have to believe that
    >>>the term was used in the context of the interview.
    >>>
    >>>Since any interview by a company official, in this case, Nikon's
    >>>president constitutes a dissemination of company policy, it can properly
    >>>be termed a 'press release.'
    >>>
    >>>As far as your other comments are concerned, I think that the above
    >>>explains my use of terminology. As far as your comment that 'obviously
    >>>you did neither' is concerned, I would only caution you not to jump to
    >>>conclusions before you go drawing conclusions which may not have the
    >>>validity you seem to think they do. IOW, ask first before you make
    >>>assumptions.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> You have worked *very hard* to earn a place in my kill file. So,
    >> congratulations!
    >>

    > Had you simply left your post of after stating that it wasn't a press
    > release, but a Bloomberg article, that would have been sufficient to point
    > out what may have been an error of omission or an assumption on my part.
    > But that wasn't sufficient for you. You simply HAD to make it personal by
    > adding the remainder of the phrases. And now you take umbrage at my
    > clarifying what I wrote and why I write it, with the appropriate caution
    > to you not to jump to additional conclusions.
    >
    > Picking up your ball and running home is hardly a mature way of dealing
    > with a disagreement. I remind you it was YOU who began the nit-picking
    > for whatever reason only you can know. Because your comments had no
    > purpose, in the manner you asserted them EXCEPT to begin an exchange that
    > you got.
    >
    > So, take your ball and run home. I could not care less if you don't reply
    > to what I may post or ask. There are others who do not jump to personal
    > attack, no matter how mild you may think it is. A more secure and mature
    > person would simply not reply to an individual he/she wants no truck with.
    > One wonders why you found it necessary to announce to the world that you
    > had a need to kill file someone as opposed to the simple expedient of
    > ignoring them.



    Welcome Alan. He put me in, defacto, when I started asking questions he
    would rather not answer about some mutual acquaintances he claimed we had.

    --
    Peter
    Peter, Jul 14, 2010
    #19
  20. Bruce

    Better Info Guest

    On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 07:30:24 -0400, Alan Lichtenstein <>
    wrote:

    >Better Info wrote:
    >
    >> On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:50:15 +0100, Bruce <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:09:06 -0700 (PDT), Rich <>
    >>>wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>On Jul 13, 5:34 pm, Alan Lichtenstein <> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>Please explain the pixel-mapping function. Is it to be used for
    >>>>>'preventative maintenance' or just if a problem is identified? The
    >>>>>manual is less than satisfactory. As an Olympus owner, I never used
    >>>>>this feature, because I had and have no problems.
    >>>>
    >>>>If a hot (or dead) pixel appears (a pixel whose response rate differs
    >>>>significantly from its neighbours) you can "map" the image of the
    >>>>adjacent pixel over the bad one, thereby eliminating it from the
    >>>>image. Kind of like how long exposure dark framing is used to
    >>>>eliminate hot pixels. I never had to use it on an Olympus either, but
    >>>>it would have come in handy with a few Nikon's I've seen.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>It was useful on the Olympus E-20 DSLR which seemed particularly prone
    >>>to hot pixels - more so than any Nikon DSLR, I suspect.

    >>
    >>
    >> EVERY sensor is prone to hot and dead pixels. Just because you don't have
    >> access to mapping them out or know about them doesn't mean that they don't
    >> exists.
    >>
    >> On average, there's at least 2,000 to 15,000 dead or hot pixels on every
    >> sensor of every size by every manufacturer. This has been found by the
    >> "badpixel.lua" script for CHDK cameras. (Through 3 years of sensors from
    >> various providers.). That LUA script required to run before using CHDK's
    >> DNG output format. CHDK has to find all the bad-pixels that the cameras
    >> already knows about before it can convert the RAW sensor data to a DNG
    >> format.
    >>
    >> If your sensor is reporting ZERO bad photosites someone is most certainly
    >> lying to you. EVERY sensor has them, to varying degrees, no matter how much
    >> money that you threw at your camera.
    >>

    >Perhaps you can add something to my question. I have never used the
    >pixel mapping function. The manufacturer suggests that it be used once
    >a year. I cannot detect any 'bad pixels' optically, albeit that is a
    >very crude and likely very imprecise function, but I see no evidence of
    >any in photographs. Consequently, I have never used the function. Are
    >you suggesting that I operate it as per the manufacturer's advice anyway?


    There's no reason to use it unless you are detecting stuck pixels in all of
    your photos. Stuck (hot or dead) pixels are a dynamic thing. They can
    change over time. Depending on static charges and stray cosmic rays, some
    can become hot or dead for weeks then suddenly clear up on their own.
    (People who fiddle with webcams and take them apart to add optics or remove
    the IR filter find this out all too well, the image can be a noisy mess for
    a week, then it just clears up one day.) Some will show up only when the
    sensor has warmed up. Others only showing when the sensor is first turned
    on, while it's still cold. I wouldn't map any out unless you absolutely
    have to.

    The nice thing about CHDK's two-fold method (noise removal on/off option)
    or the DNG saving format (requiring a different file of pixel mappings,
    filename "badpixel.bin") is that you can even edit the noise-removal's bad
    pixels file ("badpixel") by hand by entering their X,Y coordinates. One of
    my Sony superzoom cameras also has a remapping feature (button hidden in
    the battery compartment), but in the 8 year life of that camera so far I've
    never had reason to use it.

    Can you find documentation that it will remap the whole sensor and wipe out
    the old internal list of bad pixels? Or just look for new ones and add them
    to a list in memory? If the latter, then you could be losing valuable
    pixels over time if it won't free up ones that have switched from bad to
    good.

    I also wouldn't use it after the camera has been used for a long time, the
    number detected would rise with sensor temperature. When doing my own CHDK
    camera tests for shutter speeds from 1 second to 64 seconds (for a special
    build of CHDK that had a long-exposure hot-pixel removal routine, requiring
    17 different badpixel files, one for each shutter speed), it was surprising
    how many more show up as the sensor gets warmer (not shutter speed
    dependent). And many times, they were not even the same ones from session
    to session. This is probably why this special-build routine was not made
    into a base function of all CHDK builds.

    If you'd like to find out just how many bad pixels your camera has, look
    for a little utility called "DeadPixelTest.exe". Or hunt through the CHDK
    documentation for their own version called "show_bad.exe". The CHDK one
    outputs the pixels in a X,Y coordinate list from a dark-frame RAW file. You
    can also define the threshold of just how warm of a pixel you are willing
    to tolerate as bad. Most choose a threshold value of 32, 64, or 128 (on the
    RAW data, of 10 (1024), 12 (2048), or 14 (4096) bits) as being indicative
    of a too warm of a pixel, but this is just a personal preference. One of my
    CHDK cameras has an exceptionally quiet sensor on it (luck of the
    manufacturing draw) so I use a warm-pixel threshold value of only 12 on it.
    Conversely, all of those with a value of a solid zero, 0, in a RAW file
    have to be mapped out too, as being fully dead (cold, instead of warm or
    hot).
    Better Info, Jul 15, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. A New Concept in Style

    , Jul 28, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    400
  2. A New Concept in Style

    , Jul 28, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    405
  3. DC

    Re: A New Concept in Style *spam*

    DC, Jul 28, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    406
  4. Sam
    Replies:
    26
    Views:
    7,068
    Guest
    Jun 24, 2006
  5. deryck  lant
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    347
    deryck lant
    Dec 12, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page