[hoyukman]

please comment

[madxngai]

too too too too expensive

[leepsj]

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 expensive la! And it is not common system we are used to!

Could you get the lenses easily and economically?

[nlsho]

If there's no choice, it would not be a question on good or bad.
It is, til now, the only digital RF.
Hope the MD or/and digital Ikon will appear at 2006, then EPSON or/and KM might have action, and we got the choice.

[leepsj]

By that time, there will be many other alternatives, like prosumer full frame, advance 4/3, super CCD, or the new model of Contax's Foveron chips,etc.?!

[nlsho]

I do hope pana (not the brand or OIS, but Leica lens)+4/3 will give suprise. If LTM/M-mount lenses can be used on RD-1 (APS-C), that means they can also be used on an RF with 4/3 chips (not 4/3 system, the spec is not the same).
As most RF user already own 35/50, something like 15/20/25 (for 4/3, of course) will do. The RF could buy in easily (consider the RF system of RD-1, TX-1, etc.). How much for the body? Could be as low as 300e. How about the lens? The $ level of Cosina?

[leepsj]

In fact, 4/3 CCD is not a bad design and innovation. If they could further fine tune the images quality, noises, and other commonly uses functions, they could make an important impact in the DSLR market.

[nlsho]

AFAIK, the digital Zuiko is a gem in terms of resolution, especially the 50mm. The relative large diameter of the 4/3 mount helps the designer a lot, which release the limitations encountered by F-mount.

Ultrasonic Dust-off is another significant element, and the E1 is even quieter than 10D.

I stay at Canon because I do not like flash and thus, have to use high ISO often. For the majority, however, ISO400 should be more than enough? Indeed, it seems that the differences are not so great at ISO400.

[leepsj]

I do like the body of E1, but E300 is a little bit not conventional of somewhat look like a compact DC.