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 8 Jul 2010 14:21 On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 11:08:58 -0700, in <RLednVhsgvCiiavRnZ2dnUVZ_jmdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, "Frank ess" <frank(a)fshe2fs.com> wrote: >SMS wrote: >> Unfortunately his attitude extends to many other areas outside of >> digital camera equipment as well. > >---> It would be one thing if anything >> he wrote was grounded in reality and backed up by facts, but it >> rarely isn't. <--- > >Hm? Steven has a bad habit of not reflecting on the silly things he says before dashing them off, then having to try to excuse or defend them. -- 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 8 Jul 2010 14:22 On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 19:11:55 +0100, in <i154dd$gtr$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, "David J Taylor" <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >"Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote in message >news:seydnXXzTc7lYKjRnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >[] >> Well, my FZ35 is significantly more compact than my D40-family cameras >> (with usual kit lens), and those I regard as "small body" Nikons. But >> I'll agree some others (Coolpix 8800, DiMAGE 7Hi, etc.) would be >> stretching the term "compact" too far. I suppose "superzoom" is the best >> term for that type of camera since it isn't likely to be confused with >> anything else. >> >> "Compact" I think is the best used for more or less pocketable cameras >> (Optio 750Z, Coolpix 5900, Powershot S80, etc.) while "ultracompact" >> should be reserved for those cameras that are really shirt-pocket size >> (Optio S4i, Coolpix S510 and thereabouts). > >Superzoom and compact are terms I would quite happily use, while retaining >the generic term P&S to cover both. ... We wouldn't want to miss an opportunity for pejorative bashing, now would we. You must be terribly insecure and threatened. -- John "At every crossway on the road that leads to the future, each progressive spirit is opposed by a thousand men appointed to guard the past." -Maeterlinck
From: SMS on 8 Jul 2010 15:10 On 08/07/10 11:08 AM, Frank ess wrote: > > > SMS wrote: >> On 08/07/10 10:55 AM, Bruce wrote: >>> On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 11:50:56 -0400, "Neil Harrington" >>> <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: >>>> How is anything I said an "offensive put-down"? I just said I >>>> took the FZ35 because I thought it would be ideal for that >>>> situation. That's an "offensive put-down"? >>>> >>>> I think you are getting paranoid about this whole business, John. >>> >>> >>> John Navas's problem is, and always has been, that his modest needs >>> are completely satisfied by mediocre equipment. >> >> Nothing wrong with that actually, he's no different than most users >> of digital camera equipment. >> >>> He simply cannot understand why some people need, or at least >>> aspire to, something better. He gets irrationally angry when they >>> point this out, then claims that his mediocre equipment is >>> "excellent". >> >> Unfortunately his attitude extends to many other areas outside of >> digital camera equipment as well. > > > ---> It would be one thing if anything >> he wrote was grounded in reality and backed up by facts, but it >> rarely isn't. <--- > > Hm? Oops. Well you know what was intended to be written!
From: Chris Malcolm on 8 Jul 2010 15:55 John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 12:31:43 -0400, in > <seydnXXzTc7lYKjRnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, "Neil Harrington" > <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: >>"David J Taylor" <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote in message >>> What term would you suggest for such cameras - they certainly aren't >>> "compact". >> >>Well, my FZ35 is significantly more compact than my D40-family cameras (with >>usual kit lens), and those I regard as "small body" Nikons. But I'll agree >>some others (Coolpix 8800, DiMAGE 7Hi, etc.) would be stretching the term >>"compact" too far. I suppose "superzoom" is the best term for that type of >>camera since it isn't likely to be confused with anything else. >> >>"Compact" I think is the best used for more or less pocketable cameras >>(Optio 750Z, Coolpix 5900, Powershot S80, etc.) while "ultracompact" should >>be reserved for those cameras that are really shirt-pocket size (Optio S4i, >>Coolpix S510 and thereabouts). > You need to broaden your horizons -- the FZ28 is easily pocketable in > the jackets I use for outdoor shooting. My shooting waistcoat has two big pockets each one of which can easily take a medium sized DSLR fitted with a 500mm reflex lens. -- Chris Malcolm Warning: none of the above is indisputable fact.
From: nospam on 8 Jul 2010 16:17
In article <g7qdnUKqyat0bqjRnZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Neil Harrington <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: > > Offensive put-downs from dSLR fans threatened by them. Shame on you. > > Are you really that insecure? > > How is anything I said an "offensive put-down"? I just said I took the FZ35 > because I thought it would be ideal for that situation. That's an "offensive > put-down"? anything that contradicts him is a put-down. haven't you noticed? > I think you are getting paranoid about this whole business, John. very much so. |