<?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: (SR1) Fake Sony Roadmap</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr1-fake-sony-roadmap/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr1-fake-sony-roadmap/</link>
	<description>Sony Digital Camera News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:29:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Geir</title>
		<link>http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr1-fake-sony-roadmap/comment-page-1/#comment-215</link>
		<dc:creator>Geir</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 08:51:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sonyalpharumors.com/?p=140#comment-215</guid>
		<description>Do you really want 32 megapixles? I find the a900/a850 to be a bit too much, 32 would be a dealbreaker no matter what price. I just wouldn&#039;t want one because of the storage and processing requirements.

No, focus on quality, quality, quality, UI, quality and convinience, and don&#039;t forget quality.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you really want 32 megapixles? I find the a900/a850 to be a bit too much, 32 would be a dealbreaker no matter what price. I just wouldn&#8217;t want one because of the storage and processing requirements.</p>
<p>No, focus on quality, quality, quality, UI, quality and convinience, and don&#8217;t forget quality.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using xcache
Page Caching using xcache
Object Caching 501/511 objects using xcache

Served from: www.sonyalpharumors.com @ 2012-02-09 11:30:35 -->
