<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for pjadams</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/pjadams/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/pjadams/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 03:20:15 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Why the Nikon D3 Sucks (and What the D4 Oughta Be)</title><link>http://byjoeybaker.com/2009/01/08/nikon-d3/#comment-15048334</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'm surprised you left off a rather large pet-peeve of many -- the limited area covered by AF sensors.  Compare the D300 to the D700/D3, and you'll notice the AF sensors on the D300 (DX) cover more of the sensor than on the FX-sensor cameras.  I know, there's good reasons for this, but it would really make many photographers' lives easier if they didn't have to do the old "focus-and-recompose" two-step.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">pjadams</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 03:20:15 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>