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 22:34 On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 22:32:33 -0400, in <4c33e76e$0$5514$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >"John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message >news:1ip736df6gimap0kvghhu0nk974aqnqd0h(a)4ax.com... >> On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 21:56:20 -0400, in >> <4c33e12e$0$5531$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, "Peter" >> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >> >>>"nospam" <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message >>>news:060720101831213329%nospam(a)nospam.invalid... >>>> In article <4c33cc11$0$5533$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, Peter >>>> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> > 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. >>>>> >>>>> And you proof of sales of camera equipment by Wal-Mart and Best Buy is? >>>> >>>> the sleazy thing about it is he's trying to compare the sales of b&h >>>> with *total* sales of big box stores that sell all sorts of non-photo >>>> stuff. obviously, the latter is going to be higher. >>> >>>He tried the same thing, claiming Word is better than WordPerfect. His >>>proof >>>was that he wrote macros & templates for Word which made more usable than >>>WordPerfect. A valid comparison would compare out of the box to out of the >>>box. But, I just let that one go. >> >> That's not what I said, but never let facts get in the way of a bashing. >> ;) > >Go back & read it. Suggest you take your own advice. -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]
From: Peter on 6 Jul 2010 23:22 "John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:utp7369tub0mn446cn4amd7fetcoceh5jh(a)4ax.com... > On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 22:32:33 -0400, in > <4c33e76e$0$5514$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, "Peter" > <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: > >>"John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message >>news:1ip736df6gimap0kvghhu0nk974aqnqd0h(a)4ax.com... >>> On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 21:56:20 -0400, in >>> <4c33e12e$0$5531$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, "Peter" >>> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >>> >>>>"nospam" <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message >>>>news:060720101831213329%nospam(a)nospam.invalid... >>>>> In article <4c33cc11$0$5533$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, Peter >>>>> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> > 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 $100M+* my guess(tm) is >>>>>> > that >>>>>> > it's not even close to mass retailers like Walmart, Best Buy, >>>>>> > Costco. >>>>>> >>>>>> And you proof of sales of camera equipment by Wal-Mart and Best Buy >>>>>> is? >>>>> >>>>> the sleazy thing about it is he's trying to compare the sales of b&h >>>>> with *total* sales of big box stores that sell all sorts of non-photo >>>>> stuff. obviously, the latter is going to be higher. >>>> >>>>He tried the same thing, claiming Word is better than WordPerfect. His >>>>proof >>>>was that he wrote macros & templates for Word which made more usable >>>>than >>>>WordPerfect. A valid comparison would compare out of the box to out of >>>>the >>>>box. But, I just let that one go. >>> >>> That's not what I said, but never let facts get in the way of a bashing. >>> ;) >> >>Go back & read it. > > Suggest you take your own advice. > Yawn -- Peter
From: Chris Malcolm on 7 Jul 2010 15:12 Savageduck <savageduck1@{removespam}me.com> wrote: > On 2010-07-05 23:48:54 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> said: >> In article <i0uijd$nn$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, David J Taylor >> <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >> >>> There's only one person who objects to "P&S" - the rest of us are quite >>> happy! I own both and have no problem with the term. >> >> who cares what it's called. people know what is meant by p&s and slr >> and that's all that matters. language evolves. the whole pejorative >> nonsense is his way of arguing, particularly when his position is weak. > Just what is objectional and pejorative about the term "Pocketable & Small"? It doesn't apply to those P&S cameras which are the size of DSLRs :-) -- Chris Malcolm Warning: none of the above is indisputable fact.
From: Neil Harrington on 7 Jul 2010 16:03 "John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:s5e636te85o4kdf2pefhkchehbabe27eug(a)4ax.com... > On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 15:51:22 -0400, in > <zuWdnRc_Rohdqq_RnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, "Neil Harrington" > <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: > >>"John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message >>news:mmuu26l5i77o3n7vleav547rqvcs1nirv3(a)4ax.com... > >>I have the FZ35 which seems almost identical to the FZ28. I like the >>camera >>a lot, within its limitations, but it's just nonsensical to compare its >>zooming qualities with the ease, speed and accuracy of a manual zoom lens >>on >>a DSLR. > > To you. Not to me, and to others like me who have learned how to use > the power zoom effectively and comfortably. For us, zooming isn't an > issue -- it's only an issue to those who haven't learned how to use it > effectively and comfortably. I suppose you could "learn how to use" pushbuttons to sign your name -- rather than just using a pen manually -- but I doubt anyone would be able to do that "effectively and comfortably" compared with doing it manually. For one thing, a manual zoom gives you an infinite range of focal lengths; you can quickly get *precisely* the framing you want -- whereas pushbutton motorized zooms go by steps, you have to be satisfied with "close enough," and not very quickly. But apart from that, pushbuttons are just an awkward way of doing something that can be done much, much more efficiently with a simple manual control. It's somewhat like the difference between trying to regulate your speed on the highway with the + and - cruise control buttons instead of the far simpler accelerator pedal. Motorized zooms are a necessary evil on compact cameras where there just isn't any room for a manual control and the associated parts. But that's what you have: a necessary evil, not a desired thing. Make all the excuses you like and it still doesn't change that. > > p.s. The FZ35 is not "almost identical" to the FZ28 -- it has > significant differences as well as significant similarities -- you > cannot make valid judgments of one from the other. Well, my FZ35 has some improvements over your FZ28 -- nothing that changes the basic shortcomings of that type of camera, though.
From: nospam on 7 Jul 2010 16:14
In article <r-ydnZx0GIMuQKnRnZ2dnUVZ_tidnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Neil Harrington <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: > >>I have the FZ35 which seems almost identical to the FZ28. I like the > >>camera > >>a lot, within its limitations, but it's just nonsensical to compare its > >>zooming qualities with the ease, speed and accuracy of a manual zoom lens > >>a DSLR. > > > > To you. Not to me, and to others like me who have learned how to use > > the power zoom effectively and comfortably. For us, zooming isn't an > > issue -- it's only an issue to those who haven't learned how to use it > > effectively and comfortably. > > I suppose you could "learn how to use" pushbuttons to sign your name -- > rather than just using a pen manually -- but I doubt anyone would be able to > do that "effectively and comfortably" compared with doing it manually. > > For one thing, a manual zoom gives you an infinite range of focal lengths; > you can quickly get *precisely* the framing you want -- that's a bit of a stretch since you're talking a few pixels difference. > whereas pushbutton > motorized zooms go by steps, you have to be satisfied with "close enough," > and not very quickly. he said a friend of his kept overshooting the zoom and had to help him set the camera to *slow* zoom speed to not do that. > But apart from that, pushbuttons are just an awkward way of doing something > that can be done much, much more efficiently with a simple manual control. > It's somewhat like the difference between trying to regulate your speed on > the highway with the + and - cruise control buttons instead of the far > simpler accelerator pedal. exactly. now watch him point out the advantages of fly by wire. > Motorized zooms are a necessary evil on compact cameras where there just > isn't any room for a manual control and the associated parts. But that's > what you have: a necessary evil, not a desired thing. Make all the excuses > you like and it still doesn't change that. agreed. > > p.s. The FZ35 is not "almost identical" to the FZ28 -- it has > > significant differences as well as significant similarities -- you > > cannot make valid judgments of one from the other. > > Well, my FZ35 has some improvements over your FZ28 -- nothing that changes > the basic shortcomings of that type of camera, though. they're close enough to be able to assess its capabilities, and his insistence that you don't own the exact model is just an excuse. |