I woke up this morning playing with my camera and it dawned on me that it has none of the "fads" that camera makers put into their equipment. Ok maybe it is a bit old, this trend of adding things that don't work too well or have limited appeal all in the name of slapping it onto a marketing slogan so that mum and dad will spend more money on something they don't really want or need is recent. As far as I can remember I can't remember any real fads before about last year. The stuff I am talking about are things like Ultra Sonic sensor cleaning. Now the idea is good and it sounds wonderful on the brochure but so far every review I have read on a camera that includes such a technology said it borderline didn't work and when it did it only removed light dry dust which would have dislodged anyway if I stared at it long enough. I can also understand why. I've used ultrasonic cleaners before which actually did what they said on the box, except they were the size of an old CRT screen filled with fluid and had a HUGE oscillating powersupply. Yet nowadays you pretty much can't get a camera without some kind useless sensor cleaning technology. The same goes for the more recent Live view. We have made it more than 100 years by looking through a viewfinder why does every camera now feature liveview, despite taking a performance hit when turning it on. Either it needs to disable to focus or it drops back to the low contrast based focusing of the point and shoot cameras and all for what? So that we can hold our heavy cameras in front of us looking like nobs with horrible handling so that the companies can sell us more VR lenses? What worries me most is that these features cost money. I'd sooner have a camera with a better sensor or better autofocus drive than one which claims to clean itself or has features that I will never use, and if I did completely ruin the good form of holding a camera properly. These are 2 recent examples both in the last 2 years. Were there any before this?