mountainvisions Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 <p>You tell me...<br><img src="http://cfile23.uf.tistory.com/image/133036454DD1DEB306DD4E" alt="" width="680" height="471" /></p>photo source: http://goo.gl/hqVAz (official samsung blog)<p>Source blog (Endgadget)...<br>http://goo.gl/nAMbP</p><p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Laur Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 <p>That is ... <em>not</em> the official Samsung blog. You're linking to a tech chat/rumor blog, and the image (reproduced on <em>that</em> blog, and in your post), is probably naughty, from a copyright infringment perspective.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountainvisions Posted May 20, 2011 Author Share Posted May 20, 2011 <p>Ooops, yes. the link is to engadget... now fixed.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricardovaste Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 <p>Not something I would have ever thought of in honesty, but would certainly be interesting if they did do something larger than 35mm & digital. Also, what is that smaller camera in the middle? Looks interesting too ;-)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigd Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 <p>I thought you weren't supposed to post images that weren't your own work? Or are moderators not expected to follow the rules like everyone else?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starvy Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 <p>I don't know if this is someone pulling my leg but affordable medium format photography would be a dream come true!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigd Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 <p>From the photo.net Terms of Use:</p> <blockquote> <p>Photo.net includes information, images, photos, commentary, content, opinions and material that our users upload ("User Content"). You agree to upload and post only User Content that you have created yourself.</p> </blockquote> <p>Is Justin exempt from this rule for some reason? I've seen images from other people's posts removed when they were copied from other sites.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c_wyatt Posted May 21, 2011 Share Posted May 21, 2011 <p>What is all this stuff?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricardovaste Posted May 21, 2011 Share Posted May 21, 2011 <p>@Starvy: If it did exist, I think we'd be leaning towards 'different' more than outright 'value for money', simply because the production costs for a sensor this large, is always massive. It's remarkable the Pentax 645D (645? It lies!) is priced how it is in some ways.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserere_mei Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 <p>Well, Justin, the plot thickens. Check out <a href="http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/is-the-samsung-medium-format-mirrorless-camera-coming-for-real/">this post</a> at Mirrorless Rumors.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Luttmann Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 <p>Agreed Craig. This should be removed as it is against the forum rules.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now