How to tell a rank amateur from a seasoned one, or a pro
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Winter is near
Next: CMOS sensors worthless for video?
From: John Navas on 6 Jul 2010 10:18 On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 14:30:05 -0700, in <4c324ed1$0$22182$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: >On 05/07/10 1:18 PM, Neil Harrington wrote: > ><snip> > >> I agree. It's unfortunate that someone writing advertising copy for Olympus >> uses the term "point-and-shoot," but I suppose that just shows yet again how >> terminology misusage becomes popular and then practically standard usage >> through the magic of the Internet and especially Usenet, where I suspect >> most such misusage originates. > >It's not "unfortunate" it's what some marketing manager at Olympus >believed would be the best in terms of generating sales. He told you that? What's his name? >They a) don't >want to scare off buyers that previously owned a non-ultra zoom, and b) >don't want buyers that are expecting the functionality and performance >of a D-SLR to mistakenly believe that the ultra-zooms are a D-SLR >replacement. No, the term is normally used for (and only for) low=end cameras to distinguish them from high-end cameras. >> The term "point-and-shoot" *is* pejorative and inappropriate for most >> compact cameras today, IMO. > >Perhaps, but the goal here is to sell more cameras. There is a belief by >many consumers that D-SLRs are too complicated (even though of course it >can be set for automatic everything if desired). The goal here is to spread more nonsense. -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]
From: John Navas on 6 Jul 2010 10:32 On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 15:07:19 -0500, in <gie436dqgdo3vfor0co497mqgm1stucum9(a)4ax.com>, Joel Connor <myemail(a)myserver.com> wrote: >On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 08:34:21 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >>b&h photo, one of the largest if not *the* largest worldwide seller of >>photo equipment, classifies digital cameras into three categories, >>point & shoot, slr and mirrorless system cameras for the latest large >>sensor compacts, a category that didn't exist until recently. > >And many multinational drug companies, far wealthier than B&H, who are now >getting class-action lawsuits advertised on TV to try to find all those who >were injured or killed by their products will call deadly medications as >"Safe and Effective". > >Your point? > >Do you always let advertising define your reality for you? > >You have some serious problems if so. Side note: It's almost certainly a wild mischaracterization to claim B&H is "one of the largest if not *the* largest worldwide seller of photo equipment" -- even with annual sales of $100M+* my guess(tm) is that it's not even close to mass retailers like Walmart, Best Buy, Costco. * <http://www.safenet-inc.com/About_SafeNet/Customer_Success/Customer_Success_Items/B_H_Photo_Selects_SafeNet_for_PCI_Compliance.aspx> -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]
From: John Navas on 6 Jul 2010 10:34 On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 13:02:37 -0700, in <4c323a52$0$22163$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: >On 05/07/10 10:34 AM, Pete wrote: >> My perception is that hatred of DSLR owners in the various groups seems >> to be an order of magnitude worse than the pejorative remarks in the >> other direction. > >Wrong perception. There are a grand total of two people that are >pathological liars on the subject, Navas, and our favorite troll that >goes by a plethora of identities in an effort to evade everyone's kill >files. Damned by your own words. I need add nothing more. -- John "It is better to sit in silence and appear ignorant, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." -Mark Twain "A little learning is a dangerous thing." -Alexander Pope "Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn." -Benjamin Franklin
From: John Navas on 6 Jul 2010 10:38 On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 17:18:06 -0700, in <4c327632$0$22160$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: >On 05/07/10 3:52 PM, Peter wrote: > >> I go with you on that. I wonder if the attacks on DSLR owners are a form >> of penis envy. > >You don't have to wonder, it's a certainty. > >We've seen it often. A newbie compares a super-zoom to a D-SLR and >concludes, based on zoom range, megapixels, LCD size, and cost that the >super-zoom is just a slam dunk. The problem is that they understand >nothing about focusing, distortion, noise, or lighting and are >understandably disappointed when the super-zoom does not live up to >their expectations. Under these circumstances most people would say, "oh >geez, I made a mistake" but our favorite trolls are too stubborn to >admit that so instead they do what they do. The problem for you, Steven, is that your posts display tremendous ignorance of the subject in general and of equipment in particular that you pontificate about. When your "facts" are patently wrong that way, you're your own worst enemy, but you nonetheless try to disparage others just because they point out the many gross errors you make. [shrug] -- John "Never argue with an idiot. He'll drag you down to his level and then beat you with experience." -Dr. Alan Zimmerman
From: John Navas on 6 Jul 2010 10:57
On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 15:39:27 -0400, in <tN6dnRnETstqqa_RnZ2dnUVZ_v2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: >"John Navas" <jncl1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message >news:ssfu26lmvcplo9gcprh2tcjvief7i63tlg(a)4ax.com... >> On Sat, 3 Jul 2010 08:08:02 +0100, in >> <i0mnkj$j1f$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, "David J Taylor" >> <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >> >>>"nospam" <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message >>>news:020720102226416461%nospam(a)nospam.invalid... >>>[] >>>> unless the dslr isn't in a bag and the compact is in a pocket. if >>>> someone is on a shoot, they'd likely have the dslr out and ready. >>> >>>Better add the extra time pushing those P&S zoom-in and zoom-out buttons >>>alternately to get the framing approximately right as well.... >> >> Sure, for those like you who don't know how to use them effectively >> (and presume to characterize cameras they're never actually used). >> But no problem for those of us who do. > >Tell me, John, how do you use those pushbuttons "effectively" enough to come >anywhere near the speed and accuracy of a manual zoom ring? Since I often >use compact cameras as well as DSLRs, I would love to know the proper >technique. My objection is to those who put down products simply because they don't know how to use them effectively. I've used both high-end mechanical zoom lenses and high-end power zoom lenses for many years. Good as those mechanical zoom lenses are, they aren't significantly easier and faster for *me* to use than my power zoom lenses. That may be due to the way *I* work -- there may well be others for whom mechanical zoom lenses work better (and unlike others here I don't try to project my own skills, styles, and limitations onto others). If may also be due to the fact that I've learned how to use multi-speed power zoom effectively, switching speeds as appropriate. When a friend complained how the zoom would sometimes overshoot his desired setting, I found he didn't know there was a slower zoom speed available -- he thought it was only single speed. My guess(tm) is that many, perhaps even most, users have the same misconception. But all that said, it simply comes down to what works for a given person. Power zoom works great for me, but it might not work great for you. "Different strokes for different folks." I'm guessing you wouldn't like my skis either, but that doesn't make them less good than the skis you prefer -- they are stiff racing skis that perform superbly if you know how to ski them, and terribly if you don't. -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement] |