<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: (SR3) Sony mirrorless APS-C camera!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sonyalpharumors.com/sr2-sony-mirrorless-camera/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sonyalpharumors.com/sr2-sony-mirrorless-camera/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:13:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: (SR3) Sony to launche a new mirror-less camera in March? &#124; sonyalpharumors</title>
		<link>http://sonyalpharumors.com/sr2-sony-mirrorless-camera/comment-page-1/#comment-238</link>
		<dc:creator>(SR3) Sony to launche a new mirror-less camera in March? &#124; sonyalpharumors</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 08:37:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sonyalpharumors.com/?p=116#comment-238</guid>
		<description>[...] Few months ago photorumors found a probably fake spec list: http://sonyalpharumors.com/sr2-sony-mirrorless-camera/ Related Posts:(SR4) More news about the rumored GH1 Sony competitor...(SR1) First fake Sony [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Few months ago photorumors found a probably fake spec list: <a href="http://sonyalpharumors.com/sr2-sony-mirrorless-camera/" rel="nofollow">http://sonyalpharumors.com/sr2-sony-mirrorless-camera/</a> Related Posts:(SR4) More news about the rumored GH1 Sony competitor&#8230;(SR1) First fake Sony [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://sonyalpharumors.com/sr2-sony-mirrorless-camera/comment-page-1/#comment-19</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 13:53:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sonyalpharumors.com/?p=116#comment-19</guid>
		<description>Of course!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Polprav</title>
		<link>http://sonyalpharumors.com/sr2-sony-mirrorless-camera/comment-page-1/#comment-15</link>
		<dc:creator>Polprav</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2009 14:59:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sonyalpharumors.com/?p=116#comment-15</guid>
		<description>Hello from Russia!
Can I quote a post in your blog with the link to you?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello from Russia!<br />
Can I quote a post in your blog with the link to you?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vitaly</title>
		<link>http://sonyalpharumors.com/sr2-sony-mirrorless-camera/comment-page-1/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Vitaly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:06:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sonyalpharumors.com/?p=116#comment-10</guid>
		<description>Looks fake. The dimensions of the camera do not fit the proportions of the picture. Also 3&quot; LCD would look much smaller on a camera of such dimensions. Compare for example with a 3&quot; LCD on GF1 and EP1 both of which are less tall than this camera (about 70mm vs 79 for this camera)
http://a.img-dpreview.com/previews/PanasonicGF1/images/sidebysideep1back.jpg
But the specs are super sexy .... I wish there was at least a grain of truth in all this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Looks fake. The dimensions of the camera do not fit the proportions of the picture. Also 3&#8243; LCD would look much smaller on a camera of such dimensions. Compare for example with a 3&#8243; LCD on GF1 and EP1 both of which are less tall than this camera (about 70mm vs 79 for this camera)<br />
<a href="http://a.img-dpreview.com/previews/PanasonicGF1/images/sidebysideep1back.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://a.img-dpreview.com/previews/PanasonicGF1/images/sidebysideep1back.jpg</a><br />
But the specs are super sexy &#8230;. I wish there was at least a grain of truth in all this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Harold GLIT</title>
		<link>http://sonyalpharumors.com/sr2-sony-mirrorless-camera/comment-page-1/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>Harold GLIT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:15:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sonyalpharumors.com/?p=116#comment-9</guid>
		<description>The leaked pdf mentions R lenses not G lenses
also wondering if there is conversion factor since 16 mm and 60mm hardly seem interesting in terms of Focal lengths if corresponding to 35mm equivalents
H</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The leaked pdf mentions R lenses not G lenses<br />
also wondering if there is conversion factor since 16 mm and 60mm hardly seem interesting in terms of Focal lengths if corresponding to 35mm equivalents<br />
H</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
