Comments on: More on the Nikon ad http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/ where there’s smoke there’s fire Sun, 12 Feb 2012 19:45:37 +0000 hourly 1 By: Tylor http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-9967 Tylor Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:09:22 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-9967 The aperture coupling lever is also missing, something that isn't used with the new PC-E lenses. Now for all anyone knows the latest G-Type lenses also have an electromagnetic diaphragm, and nikon is slowly shifting to totally electronic control slowly much like they did with the transition to auto focus in the 80's-90's. This would preserve backward compatibility for zoom lenses released within the last 7-8ish years to keep people happy, but force people who insist on primes to buy a new set of new G lenses if they want to use the newest pro body. Now i know that no lenses other then the PC-E ones explicitly state an electromagnetic diaphragm, but the F4 had contacts for AF-I and AF-S long before any lenses used an internal motor and if Nikon is planning to introduce a new line of fixed focal AF-S lenses anyways it would seem like a good time to introduce this (crippling) refresh of the mount. It also means Sigma, Tameron, Tokina, and the like will be left in the cold with no lenses that will definitely work on the most current nikon pro body. I have been thinking something like this would happen since the PC-E lenses were first announced, but i could be completely wrong. The aperture coupling lever is also missing, something that isn’t used with the new PC-E lenses. Now for all anyone knows the latest G-Type lenses also have an electromagnetic diaphragm, and nikon is slowly shifting to totally electronic control slowly much like they did with the transition to auto focus in the 80′s-90′s. This would preserve backward compatibility for zoom lenses released within the last 7-8ish years to keep people happy, but force people who insist on primes to buy a new set of new G lenses if they want to use the newest pro body. Now i know that no lenses other then the PC-E ones explicitly state an electromagnetic diaphragm, but the F4 had contacts for AF-I and AF-S long before any lenses used an internal motor and if Nikon is planning to introduce a new line of fixed focal AF-S lenses anyways it would seem like a good time to introduce this (crippling) refresh of the mount. It also means Sigma, Tameron, Tokina, and the like will be left in the cold with no lenses that will definitely work on the most current nikon pro body. I have been thinking something like this would happen since the PC-E lenses were first announced, but i could be completely wrong.

]]> By: Sean http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-664 Sean Thu, 02 Oct 2008 18:54:18 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-664 Why is everyone so focused on the elements which could be of different size in a larger format system? i.e. if the sensor will be bigger, so will the mount, etc... What could we measure that will be the same in both cameras and on which base a decision? Oh yeah, the front dial will be the same in every camera produced. And coincidentally, when you measure the ratio of mount diameter to dial width, and then take a ratio of ratios between the ad camera and the D700 (or D3 if you like), we get ~1.31. Curiously, the linear dimensions of a 35mm FF sensor are 36x24mm and a MF sensor are 48x36mm, or a linear ratio of ~ 1.33.<br /><br />Now you all debate whether you think the ad is real or not because I frankly have no idea. But if it is real, it is a MF sensor and mount system; one which I would expect to have a different mount than previous simply because of the increased glass size / great opportunity to up the technological ante.<br /><br />Sean Why is everyone so focused on the elements which could be of different size in a larger format system? i.e. if the sensor will be bigger, so will the mount, etc… What could we measure that will be the same in both cameras and on which base a decision? Oh yeah, the front dial will be the same in every camera produced. And coincidentally, when you measure the ratio of mount diameter to dial width, and then take a ratio of ratios between the ad camera and the D700 (or D3 if you like), we get ~1.31. Curiously, the linear dimensions of a 35mm FF sensor are 36x24mm and a MF sensor are 48x36mm, or a linear ratio of ~ 1.33.

Now you all debate whether you think the ad is real or not because I frankly have no idea. But if it is real, it is a MF sensor and mount system; one which I would expect to have a different mount than previous simply because of the increased glass size / great opportunity to up the technological ante.

Sean

]]> By: seth http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-663 seth Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:21:15 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-663 I think, the picture of sensor comparison it´s made with differents focal lenses. i mean, you can take the same view with different focal lens and you can get the 1st plane (mount)with the same scale but not the back (sensor) I think, the picture of sensor comparison it´s made with differents focal lenses. i mean, you can take the same view with different focal lens and you can get the 1st plane (mount)with the same scale but not the back (sensor)

]]> By: Michael http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-662 Michael Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:35:07 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-662 Regarding the different sensor size... it occurs to me that if this was indeed a mirrorless design a'la Micro Four Thirds, the sensor would be closer to the lens mount thus appearing bigger in the photograph. So my money is on a rangefinder-style camera with an FX sensor. Regarding the different sensor size… it occurs to me that if this was indeed a mirrorless design a’la Micro Four Thirds, the sensor would be closer to the lens mount thus appearing bigger in the photograph. So my money is on a rangefinder-style camera with an FX sensor.

]]> By: Pablov http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-661 Pablov Wed, 01 Oct 2008 23:51:37 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-661 Hi folks :)<br /><br />this one became a kind of debate before the elections :D<br /><br />I would like some news about a new D800 or so, more than a new project :(<br /><br />Regards ! :) Hi folks :)

this one became a kind of debate before the elections :D

I would like some news about a new D800 or so, more than a new project :(

Regards ! :)

]]> By: Blog Admin http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-660 Blog Admin Wed, 01 Oct 2008 23:17:29 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-660 No problem, keep it up Jurgen - you keep keep me in check. No problem, keep it up Jurgen – you keep keep me in check.

]]> By: Screwball http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-659 Screwball Wed, 01 Oct 2008 22:20:34 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-659 If you rescale the image so the screw heads and the line of contacts are the same size as the D700 mount, you'll get the real picture of what you're looking at here. These mounts are not the same size. If you rescale the image so the screw heads and the line of contacts are the same size as the D700 mount, you’ll get the real picture of what you’re looking at here. These mounts are not the same size.

]]> By: Juergen http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-658 Juergen Wed, 01 Oct 2008 12:09:30 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-658 I don't know if it is fake or not. I was only referring to the claim the mirror to be wider - as much as I can work out the width/height ratio is 3:2 as with all the current F-mount Nikons. And looking at the NewAd front photo I also think it is a usual FX bayonet as the lens contacts seem to have the corresponding size. Obviously some photoshopping is involved as the third inner chromed lip on the mount is missing. And I think the aperture lever for the lens is photoshopped out - but of course it doesn't necessarily mean the whole thing is fake, it could e.g. also be a placeholder graphic for the final photos. Who knows?<br />And from the rear it looks strange, too, as the usual eyepiece shutter lever (at the ten o'clock position with D3 et. al.) is missing and it seems strange to me to have something bright around the eyepiece, giving the possibility to cause unwanted reflections. But here maybe a mock-up only or a placeholder.<br /><br />And yes, I know running a rumour site is not easy...<br />What I really liked were news about the D90, the leaked D700 brochure, the D60 Black Gold and such, and I know my criticisms gets on the nerve of some people, but I think it to be constructive and to do more for the site than applauding posts. I don’t know if it is fake or not. I was only referring to the claim the mirror to be wider – as much as I can work out the width/height ratio is 3:2 as with all the current F-mount Nikons. And looking at the NewAd front photo I also think it is a usual FX bayonet as the lens contacts seem to have the corresponding size. Obviously some photoshopping is involved as the third inner chromed lip on the mount is missing. And I think the aperture lever for the lens is photoshopped out – but of course it doesn’t necessarily mean the whole thing is fake, it could e.g. also be a placeholder graphic for the final photos. Who knows?
And from the rear it looks strange, too, as the usual eyepiece shutter lever (at the ten o’clock position with D3 et. al.) is missing and it seems strange to me to have something bright around the eyepiece, giving the possibility to cause unwanted reflections. But here maybe a mock-up only or a placeholder.

And yes, I know running a rumour site is not easy…
What I really liked were news about the D90, the leaked D700 brochure, the D60 Black Gold and such, and I know my criticisms gets on the nerve of some people, but I think it to be constructive and to do more for the site than applauding posts.

]]> By: Blog Admin http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-657 Blog Admin Wed, 01 Oct 2008 10:23:00 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-657 Jurgen, thanks for the detailed explanation - it does make sense, but I am still not convinced that this is fake. I am not convinced that it 's real either. I do agree that my statement could be misleading since we don't have enough information to make an intelligent choice. In general, as you probably noticed, I am trying not give my own opinion but just present the material I find. This is a rumor site and everything should be questioned - that's the main reason I am running it - to clarify things, since I do not know everything. I also try to keep the post short and condense, so you don't have to spend hours reading like some other sites. I do usually one or two posts per day and trust me I have a lot of material waiting in my mail box, so I am definitely not desperate for posts in any way. Of course I cannot deliver leaks like the <span><a href="http://nikonrumors.com/2008/08/15/we-asked-for-it-and-we-got-it--nikon-d90-lcd-screen-in-video-mode.aspx" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">D90</a></span> (first real pictures exclusively reported here first) and the D700 every day, but the rest are still rumors and will be reported. It will take you no longer than 5 minutes a day to check what's new. Jurgen, thanks for the detailed explanation – it does make sense, but I am still not convinced that this is fake. I am not convinced that it ‘s real either. I do agree that my statement could be misleading since we don’t have enough information to make an intelligent choice. In general, as you probably noticed, I am trying not give my own opinion but just present the material I find. This is a rumor site and everything should be questioned – that’s the main reason I am running it – to clarify things, since I do not know everything. I also try to keep the post short and condense, so you don’t have to spend hours reading like some other sites. I do usually one or two posts per day and trust me I have a lot of material waiting in my mail box, so I am definitely not desperate for posts in any way. Of course I cannot deliver leaks like the D90 (first real pictures exclusively reported here first) and the D700 every day, but the rest are still rumors and will be reported. It will take you no longer than 5 minutes a day to check what’s new.

]]> By: Blog Admin http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-656 Blog Admin Wed, 01 Oct 2008 09:34:38 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-656 This is what I had in mind when I said that the text in the D700 ads did not make sense. This is what I had in mind when I said that the text in the D700 ads did not make sense.

]]> By: rthomas http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-655 rthomas Wed, 01 Oct 2008 09:04:55 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-655 I agree, I think the "mystery photo" was made with a longer lens from a greater distance, resulting in the apparent size difference. It looks like a change in perspective to me, nothing more. Add to that the missing bayonet flange and the missing aperture lever, and I think this one is a fake. I agree, I think the “mystery photo” was made with a longer lens from a greater distance, resulting in the apparent size difference. It looks like a change in perspective to me, nothing more. Add to that the missing bayonet flange and the missing aperture lever, and I think this one is a fake.

]]> By: Juergen http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-654 Juergen Wed, 01 Oct 2008 09:00:48 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-654 Sorry the text layout is distorted, I composed the posting externally. Sorry the text layout is distorted, I composed the posting externally.

]]> By: Juergen http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-653 Juergen Wed, 01 Oct 2008 08:58:26 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-653 Yes, the thing with the "s" from "system's" in the next line is a clear mistake. Mistakes happen.<br />Maybe the brochure wee see was before final correction, maybe not.<br />A good friend of mine is a correctional editor/chief (Schlussredakteur/Textchef) with a major German computer magazine - his stories of mistakes would fill whole books. Also look carefully at any printed magazine, I detect sooo many mistakes in them (from "Time" to "Der Spiegel" to you-name-it) that I really don't see why such a mistake (which SHOULD not happen!) can lead to the conclusion "the English text did not make any sense". Yes, the thing with the “s” from “system’s” in the next line is a clear mistake. Mistakes happen.
Maybe the brochure wee see was before final correction, maybe not.
A good friend of mine is a correctional editor/chief (Schlussredakteur/Textchef) with a major German computer magazine – his stories of mistakes would fill whole books. Also look carefully at any printed magazine, I detect sooo many mistakes in them (from “Time” to “Der Spiegel” to you-name-it) that I really don’t see why such a mistake (which SHOULD not happen!) can lead to the conclusion “the English text did not make any sense”.

]]> By: Juergen http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-652 Juergen Wed, 01 Oct 2008 08:48:21 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-652 Ok Peter,<br /><br />I intentionally don't simply put a screenshot here, but a detailed explanation so everyone can do it themselves to see.<br /><br />To see if both camera's mirrors are the same in width open both pictures <br />D700: nikon_d7001.jpg<br /><a href="http://images.quickblogcast.com/3/2/2/2/2/130718-122223/nikon_d7001.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://images.quickblogcast.com/3/2/2/2/2/130718-122223/nikon_d7001.jpg</a><br />New Jap ad: NewNikonAd.jpg<br /><a href="http://images.quickblogcast.com/3/2/2/2/2/130718-122223/NewNikonAd.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://images.quickblogcast.com/3/2/2/2/2/130718-122223/NewNikonAd.jpg</a><br />in photoshop, D700 enlarge to 300 percent, NewAd to 310 percent. <br /><br />Select the measurement tool and measure<br />both camera's mirrors X- and Y-axis<br />(photoshop shows the figures on top below the menue bar).<br /><br />D700 I start X-axis at X195 and Y 205 and have a length of 84. Y-axis I start at X196 and Y205 and measure 49 height.<br />We note: 84 wide, 49 high.<br /><br />NewAd I start X-axis at X208 and Y170 and measure 89 wide. Y-axis I start at X210 and Y170, measuring then 52.<br /><br />So now calculate 89:84 and multiply the result with 49 - and you have 52!<br />(Or to be precise using the Windows calculator 89:84 is 1,0595238095238095238095238095238,<br />multiply that with 49 gives nearly 52,<br />51,916666666666666666666666666667 to be<br />precise.<br /><br />As the NewAd is very fuzzy/unsharp it's not so easy to define the starting and ending points, so the result may not be 100 percent exact, but exact enough to clearly say both mirrors have the same width/height ratio.<br /><br />That is easily to proof - claiming otherwise is exactly what I said, "making up a story".<br /><br />Peter, I appreciate you run this site (otherwise I would not take any of my very restricted time to visit the site and to comment), but I want to read real rumours and/or news and not<br />obvious nonsense.<br /><br />btw: I would like the comment typing window to be bigger, it's hard to type any longer post. Ok Peter,

I intentionally don’t simply put a screenshot here, but a detailed explanation so everyone can do it themselves to see.

To see if both camera’s mirrors are the same in width open both pictures
D700: nikon_d7001.jpg
http://images.quickblogcast.com/3/2/2/2/2/130718-122223/nikon_d7001.jpg
New Jap ad: NewNikonAd.jpg
http://images.quickblogcast.com/3/2/2/2/2/130718-122223/NewNikonAd.jpg
in photoshop, D700 enlarge to 300 percent, NewAd to 310 percent.

Select the measurement tool and measure
both camera’s mirrors X- and Y-axis
(photoshop shows the figures on top below the menue bar).

D700 I start X-axis at X195 and Y 205 and have a length of 84. Y-axis I start at X196 and Y205 and measure 49 height.
We note: 84 wide, 49 high.

NewAd I start X-axis at X208 and Y170 and measure 89 wide. Y-axis I start at X210 and Y170, measuring then 52.

So now calculate 89:84 and multiply the result with 49 – and you have 52!
(Or to be precise using the Windows calculator 89:84 is 1,0595238095238095238095238095238,
multiply that with 49 gives nearly 52,
51,916666666666666666666666666667 to be
precise.

As the NewAd is very fuzzy/unsharp it’s not so easy to define the starting and ending points, so the result may not be 100 percent exact, but exact enough to clearly say both mirrors have the same width/height ratio.

That is easily to proof – claiming otherwise is exactly what I said, “making up a story”.

Peter, I appreciate you run this site (otherwise I would not take any of my very restricted time to visit the site and to comment), but I want to read real rumours and/or news and not
obvious nonsense.

btw: I would like the comment typing window to be bigger, it’s hard to type any longer post.

]]> By: Blog Admin http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-651 Blog Admin Wed, 01 Oct 2008 08:24:33 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-651 <div>Jurgen,</div>Here my friend - I spent hours with those ads and I still remember almost every line:<div><br><div><span><img src="http://images.quickblogcast.com/3/2/2/2/2/130718-122223/Nikon_D7003.jpg" border="0" width="640"></span><br></div><div><br></div><div>"the word system's is used, with system on one line and the s on the next"</div><div><br></div><div>English grammar is not my strong point as you probably have noticed, but I think the above mistake is not acceptable for Nikon's official D700 catalog. I am not sure if they corrected the final version of this brochure. There are few more sentences that do not make sense - you can read the comments to <span><a href="http://nikonrumors.com/2008/06/18/more-nikon-d700-pictures-plus-do-i-see-some-new-lenses.aspx" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">this</a></span> and <span><a href="http://nikonrumors.com/2008/06/17/nikon-d700.aspx" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">this</a></span> posts if you have time. </div><div>Now I have to go, because I have something else to show you and would like to hear your opinion. Stay tuned!</div></div> Jurgen,

Here my friend – I spent hours with those ads and I still remember almost every line:

“the word system’s is used, with system on one line and the s on the next”
English grammar is not my strong point as you probably have noticed, but I think the above mistake is not acceptable for Nikon’s official D700 catalog. I am not sure if they corrected the final version of this brochure. There are few more sentences that do not make sense – you can read the comments to this and this posts if you have time. 
Now I have to go, because I have something else to show you and would like to hear your opinion. Stay tuned!
]]> By: Juergen http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-650 Juergen Wed, 01 Oct 2008 08:04:14 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-650 Of course I read it, otherwise I would not be able to comment it.<br />So the ball is back in your court, means tell me some examples where "the English text did not make any sense".<br /><br />And YES, a great number of my employees doesn't like it when I look precisely and clear at things, quickly revealing any "polishing" of facts and/or truth...<br />And of course I see the pressure you have with wanting to present news every day - obviously I have higher standards than you in terms of that, with some storiws I would simply refrain from putting on the site. Of course I read it, otherwise I would not be able to comment it.
So the ball is back in your court, means tell me some examples where “the English text did not make any sense”.

And YES, a great number of my employees doesn’t like it when I look precisely and clear at things, quickly revealing any “polishing” of facts and/or truth…
And of course I see the pressure you have with wanting to present news every day – obviously I have higher standards than you in terms of that, with some storiws I would simply refrain from putting on the site.

]]> By: Blog Admin http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-649 Blog Admin Wed, 01 Oct 2008 08:03:47 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-649 Let's put it this way - I do not know the source directly. Can't say more, but wait until you see the second ad... Let’s put it this way – I do not know the source directly. Can’t say more, but wait until you see the second ad…

]]> By: Blog Admin http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-648 Blog Admin Wed, 01 Oct 2008 08:01:07 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-648 Thank you - I hope Jurgen will read this.... <div>wait until you see the next ad I just got..... it will be online shortly</div> Thank you – I hope Jurgen will read this…. 
wait until you see the next ad I just got….. it will be online shortly
]]> By: ZoetMB http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-647 ZoetMB Wed, 01 Oct 2008 07:43:28 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-647 Regarding the D700 brochure, that WAS not the brochure that Nikon actually used. There were many typos and widows in the leaked brochure that did not wind up in the final one, which is why I thought the leaked brochure was a fake. It's still hard to figure out what it was because it had printers marks on it and looked like it came off press, but they would never be copy-editing at that point.<br /><br />As for these images, note the grip which seems to be triangular instead of round (or square, like the old grip for the F3HP). I can't believe that Nikon would produce such a grip, so I think this might only be a very loose rendering of "something" and so the sizes may be irrelevant. Regarding the D700 brochure, that WAS not the brochure that Nikon actually used. There were many typos and widows in the leaked brochure that did not wind up in the final one, which is why I thought the leaked brochure was a fake. It’s still hard to figure out what it was because it had printers marks on it and looked like it came off press, but they would never be copy-editing at that point.

As for these images, note the grip which seems to be triangular instead of round (or square, like the old grip for the F3HP). I can’t believe that Nikon would produce such a grip, so I think this might only be a very loose rendering of “something” and so the sizes may be irrelevant.

]]> By: martin http://nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx/comment-page-1/#comment-646 martin Wed, 01 Oct 2008 06:29:54 +0000 http://nikonrumors.com/http:/nikonrumors.com/2008/09/30/more-on-the-nikon-ad.aspx#comment-646 Did anyone noticed, that D700 mount poses 3 "feathers" located at 120deg, and "MX" only two asymmetrically located (120deg/240deg). It doesn't make sense... Did anyone noticed, that D700 mount poses 3 “feathers” located at 120deg, and “MX” only two asymmetrically located (120deg/240deg). It doesn’t make sense…

]]>