[jmills8]

Some people have short memories. The 1960s and 70s were the age of the Nikon F. They ruled the world of photography.

AAA not camera talk.

 

[god-bluff]

AAA not camera talk.

AAA? Don't know what that means. Other than Anti Aircraft Artillery which is really 'off topic' IMO.

Didn't get an answer to my valid 'on topic' question so thought I'd join in on this subject instead

 

[jmills8]

AAA? Don't know what that means. Other than Anti Aircraft Artillery which is really 'off topic' IMO.

Didn't get an answer to my valid 'on topic' question so thought I'd join in on this subject instead

 

[Torq]

Some people have short memories. The 1960s and 70s were the age of the Nikon F. They ruled the world of photography.

It'd be hard for me to "remember" that; my memory is definitely shorter than 56 years ... as I wasn't even born then.

Nikon F series SLRs are legendary. And still a completely different kettle of fish than the Leica M.

If you want a compact, full-frame, digital or analog, interchangeable lens camera today, or want native use of the best compact full-frame lenses (tiny compared to any of the full-frame SLR options), or if you just want a rangefinder then Nikon have nothing to sell you.

That's not a slight against Nikon; they just don't target that market.

...

Back to the regular programming ...

I'm in the camp that prefers the Mojo over the Hugo. Not that I think the Mojo is "technically" better ... I just prefer its signature over the Hugo.

 

[Torq]

Almost impossible, I have given up that search for the time being.

Try here.

I bought two ... they work fine ... Retina MacBook to Mojo.

 

[freitz]

   
Yep!
 
I ditched my extensive Canon/L-series lens DSLR setup, a four-body/10-lens u43 system and a complete Fuji X system (literally every lens in the lineup) and switched primarily to Leica.
 
Now I shoot with the new M-P (Type 240) and the M9-P for my serious stuff with the handful of fast-glass that I need. I also have a Leica D-Lux (109) and V-Lux (114) for less critical stuff.  And as a "take everywhere" camera, I use a little Sony RX-100 Mk 3.
 
 

I ditched all my canon stuff about 3 years ago. I still have my M240 with 25,50 lux and 21. All I need really need.
 
I still have a Dlux 109, Sold my T, and I have an x2.

 

[maxh22]

Let's put it this way ... IF it works all, it's also, by definition, blocking the signal from your phone on the side that it's applied. That'll clobber reception, and cause the phone to raise the gain on the radio amplifiers to try to compensate ... which will result in more heat and a sizable drop in battery life!

I'm just reporting what I believe to be true. I'm not too sure about their other claims regarding minimzing radiation but one thing is for certain, I'm getting significantly less static with the radisafe on vs off

 

[Torq]

I'm just reporting what I believe to be true. I'm not too sure about their other claims regarding minimzing radiation but one thing is for certain, I'm getting significantly less static with the radisafe on vs off

 
There are certainly "shields" of this nature that work (though some, perhaps most, are just foil stickers) - generally by absorbing a range of frequencies and converting them to heat (as otherwise they would require a ground connection in order to work), or reflecting them.  No rocket science there - we do that in design all the time.
 
The "radiation" claims ARE the radio waves that your phone is DESIGNED to emit, as that's how phones work.  Blocking radiation isn't hard at all.  No mysteries or voodoo science required to do that.
 
But there's no such thing as a free lunch; and the physics are simple here - if it's blocking the radio emissions from the phone (which it MUST be if it works) then it is also impeding the phones operation (ignore the "signal strength bars", they're typically meaningless).  The net effect of which is what I described.  You can't get around that.  So if it's blocking RFI then it's blocking the intended output of the phone on the side it is applied.
 
The smart way to use something like this would be to put it on the DAC instead.

 

[musiclvr]

There are certainly "shields" of this nature that work (though some, perhaps most, are just foil stickers) - generally by absorbing a range of frequencies and converting them to heat (as otherwise they would require a ground connection in order to work), or reflecting them.  No rocket science there - we do that in design all the time.

The "radiation" claims ARE the radio waves that your phone is DESIGNED to emit, as that's how phones work.  Blocking radiation isn't hard at all.  No mysteries or voodoo science required to do that.

But there's no such thing as a free lunch; and the physics are simple here - if it's blocking the radio emissions from the phone (which it MUST be if it works) then it is also impeding the phones operation (ignore the "signal strength bars", they're typically meaningless).  The net effect of which is what I described.  You can't get around that.  So if it's blocking RFI then it's blocking the intended output of the phone on the side it is applied.

The smart way to use something like this would be to put it on the DAC instead.

Sage advice! This thread is just so interesting at times

 

[audionewbi]

I am falling out of love, I hope the accessories bring anew purpose to mojo,l. It's too thick for portable use, and for home use well i got Hugo.

 

[warrior1975]

It's less than ideal, completely agree. I still love it though. I've toyed with the idea of getting a Hugo, but I want to try another brand, ifi is my next choice.

 

[apainlessa]

I don't ever use it on the go anymore, got to agree it's too bulky and heavy and I'm not keen on straps or bands to keep it in place, it's such a clumsy solution. It is permanently connected to my pc and the outputs are connected to my headphones and speaker amplifier. Works like a dream!

 

[LouisArmstrong]

   
Certainly not less bass. And if you really want better sound, the TT has greater authority in the bass plus the openess of the Mojo and Hugo. You pays your money ....

How about Dave?

 

[warrior1975]

Dave seems to be very well received, but at $13k, way out of my budget. I'd love to hear it and I am extremely curious as to how it sounds. I can't imagine it would be a tremendous improvement, but likely I'll never know.

 

[LouisArmstrong]

Dave seems to be very well received, but at $13k, way out of my budget. I'd love to hear it and I am extremely curious as to how it sounds. I can't imagine it would be a tremendous improvement, but likely I'll never know.

The price is actually pretty reasonable if you look at it this way  - there is only one other DAC manufacturer that uses its own FPGA circuit for its DACs, rather than stuffing stock ICs into fancy boxes, and the stuff that other manufacturer makes has a price tag of over $100K.