From: Outing Trolls is FUN! on
On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 09:13:06 -0700, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}> wrote:

>Some will be happy with what they bought, others will
>move on to grow into something more sophisticated.

Such as this <>

Far more sophisticated than any DSLRs capabilities on the planet. I doubt
you could learn all the manual and automated controls of any CHDK capable
camera in even one year's time. Considering that you can't even figure out
how to use the EV compensation button on your DSLR yet. Every last one of
your photos have more than proved that.

"DSLR" doesn't automatically mean "upgrade". A DSLR is just different, and
that's all it is, not better. For some who are far more talented and
experienced than you are or will ever be, going back to DSLRs would be a
huge downgrade and hindrance again. A definitive evolutionary and
revolutionary leap backward on the camera adaptability and functionality
scale. When are you DSLR-TROLLS going to figure this out. Probably never.
As already said, you can't even figure out what an EV compensation button
is for yet as proved in all of your photography examples. If you can't even
comprehend how to use that properly or even what it is for, you wouldn't be
able to comprehend things far more sophisticated nor why others find value
in them. It would be like asking you to compose a concerto when your mind
and experiences only allow you to hear and comprehend one note all your
life. You must live within your limited view of things while you sit back
trying to convince everyone else who can hear from 20 Hz to 20 kHz why you
only need one note. Those who can hear the full spectrum just have to learn
to tolerate your severe and debilitating limitations. The best we can hope
for is to alert all others of your crippling handicap in life. Luckily, you
help in that regard. Every time you post one of your photos.

From: Ray Fischer on
RichA <rander3127(a)> wrote:
>This is Samsung's latest P&S's tested, arguably, one of the better

Yes, yes, you're an elitist snob and troll and you hate everything.

Got it.

You've made your point.

Ray Fischer

From: SneakyP on
tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)> wrote in

> On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 09:13:06 -0700, Savageduck
> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}> wrote:
>>. My G11 is one such higher priced
>>compact, but it supplements my D300s and has the level of user control
>>I want.
> All this fuss over terms...I don't see the G11 as "compact". The
> mainstream point-and-shoots *are* compact. They a slim, capable of
> fitting in a shirt pocket or a trouser pocket without bulge or weight,
> and they are truly compact cameras.
> The G11 camera body seems to me to be almost as large and bulky as a
> slr or dslr with a 55mm (or thereabouts) size lens. Yes, there are
> pockets that will accommodate them, but big pockets.
> The term "point and shoot" came into use because it described the
> simplicity of operation. Then, camera makers started adding options
> to these cameras that allow the user to choose between the simple
> settings and more advanced settings.
> The less complicated the camera, the more compact it can be. The
> basic point-and-shoots are more deserving of the description "compact"
> than the upper-tier non-dslrs owned by people who object to their
> cameras being called "point and shoot" cameras. Yet, they want their
> cameras called "compacts" to avoid the perception of owning something
> simple.
> I really can't understand the distress expressed by those who object
> to the "point and shoot" term. It's the photograph that is judged,
> not the device that took it.
It has to be a price vs. equipment issue skewed in a world where more
equipment doesn't necessarily mean more pictures (or better quality
pictures), yet the perception of the public is that mr. multi-lensed
camera carrier will always compose the better picture simply because
he/she has more options.

There's a tradeoff in going either direction - and both marketing camps
know them enough to minimize their own shortcomings.

::Shrugs my shoulders

To email me, you know what to do.