For Rich and his fans.

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by Henry, Feb 1, 2010.

  1. Henry

    Henry Guest

    1. Advertisements

  2. Henry

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Rich is an arrogant asshole who thinks that everybody should live by
    HIS standards of suitability.
     
    Ray Fischer, Feb 2, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Henry

    Ray Fischer Guest

    I didn't write "must".
    You don't even know what "good camera" means.
     
    Ray Fischer, Feb 2, 2010
    #3
  4. Henry

    Henry Guest

    You really need to see this video through.



    Not bad for a plastic encased lens! And cheap, great optics.
    By Canon!!!!!

    Comments would be welcome.

    Henry.
     
    Henry, Feb 2, 2010
    #4
  5. Henry

    NameHere Guest

    People capable of using good cameras are just as capable with lesser
    cameras. If someone hands me an Instamatic-126 camera because that's all
    they have, I'll still be able to return to them a photo from that camera
    worthy of framing for anyone's wall. Nor will I look down my nose at them
    for not providing me with better equipment. Because I know how to get an
    exceptional photo out of any camera capable of creating an image. There are
    no bad cameras. There are only bad photographers.

    A Master Chef can create a culinary masterpiece using any cooking method at
    their disposal. Ever been to a good luau? Hot rocks, leaves, and sand are
    all that's needed for cooking utensils. In the right hands and minds that
    is all the equipment that is needed to create a meal that you'll never
    forget. It's not the cooking equipment, it's the chef. It's not the camera,
    it's the photographer.

    You and all like you have learned absolutely nothing, and your perpetual
    display of this only proves that you and all like you are incapable of ever
    learning anything.

    I can guarantee you only one thing: You'll NEVER NEVER NEVER be worthwhile
    photographers because you have convinced yourselves that its the camera's
    fault or success.

    I pity you.
     
    NameHere, Feb 2, 2010
    #5
  6. Henry

    NameHere Guest

    People capable of using good cameras are just as capable with lesser
    cameras. If someone hands me an Instamatic-126 camera because that's all
    they have, I'll still be able to return to them a photo from that camera
    worthy of framing for anyone's wall. Nor will I look down my nose at them
    for not providing me with better equipment. Because I know how to get an
    exceptional photo out of any camera capable of creating an image. There are
    no bad cameras. There are only bad photographers.

    A Master Chef can create a culinary masterpiece using any cooking method at
    their disposal. Ever been to a good luau? Hot rocks, leaves, and sand are
    all that's needed for cooking utensils. In the right hands and minds that
    is all the equipment that is needed to create a meal that you'll never
    forget. It's not the cooking equipment, it's the chef. It's not the camera,
    it's the photographer.

    You and all like you have learned absolutely nothing, and your perpetual
    display of this only proves that you and all like you are incapable of ever
    learning anything.

    I can guarantee you only one thing: You'll NEVER NEVER NEVER be worthwhile
    photographers because you have convinced yourselves that its the camera's
    fault or success.

    I pity you.
     
    NameHere, Feb 2, 2010
    #6
  7. Henry

    Dave Cohen Guest

    Please don't. Most of us find accepting pity from anonymous posters
    provides little comfort, particularly when the poster is obviously a
    self centered obnoxious idiot.
     
    Dave Cohen, Feb 2, 2010
    #7
  8. Henry

    Paul Furman Guest

    Heh :)

    I actually did that to a lens recently, a junky (Makinon?) 28mm f/2.8.
    It broke easier than that, perhaps because of the metal mounting.
     
    Paul Furman, Feb 2, 2010
    #8
  9. Henry

    Henry Guest

    Tut tut........<Wink wink !!!!>
     
    Henry, Feb 2, 2010
    #9
  10. Henry

    Archie Guest

    Well put.

    --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---
     
    Archie, Feb 2, 2010
    #10
  11. Henry

    NameHere Guest

    And yet it doesn't refute what was stated, not one bit. It must feel pretty
    bad to now know why you'll never be a photographer of any sort, probably
    not even much of a lowly snapshooter either. But I suspect, deep down
    inside, that all of you already knew this about yourselves. It's why you
    painstakingly go through the motions of always blaming your cameras in news
    groups. Advertising to the world just what pathetic losers you are in the
    world of photography. There can be no other reason.

    Do continue to prove it to the world.....
     
    NameHere, Feb 2, 2010
    #11
  12. Henry

    Ofnuts Guest

    Because what you say is irrefutable. Any of us can also boast that he
    can make the best photos in the world, and then refuse to show any to
    prove it. You are on the same stand as religious miracles. Either we
    believe, or we don't. Practical evidence is that there is no gain in
    believing in the Holy P&S of Antioche, or in His Prophet, since His ways
    are unfathomable and the Brand and Model of the Holy P&S that blows thy
    enemy's DSLR to tiny bits shall be kept secret. So far NameHereism
    hasn't gathered many followers, because even though there are plenty of
    gullible people on this planet, they still want to see something (read:
    a hint that God has some interest in them). But we are more likely to
    see proof of extraterrestrial intelligence than a picture from the Holy
    P&S or the Prophet, let alone a good one.
     
    Ofnuts, Feb 2, 2010
    #12
  13. Henry

    NameHere Guest

    That's because you and your kind are the most lost of all.

    "There are none so lost as those who follow."

    Think about it. I'm sure you have the time. You probably don't have the
    mental acuity to comprehend that, but you most certainly have the time.

    Only DSLR proponents are followers. They can never think for themselves.
    Even worse, they doubt their choices so much that they don't feel
    vindicated unless they can convince everyone else to believe as they
    believe and make the same camera purchasing mistakes that they make in
    life. The greater their insistence to have others buy DSLRs the more they
    show their insecurity in their own decision to do so. Just like those who
    doubt their religions the most, always being the most vocal about wanting
    others to believe as they do. Because if they can convince someone else,
    then perhaps they can stop doubting their own beliefs so much. It's that
    simple.

    Further, there is no need to prove anything to the likes of you. True
    professionals who have used all manner of cameras discover what I said all
    on their own. They already know these things of which I speak. I'm just
    letting you know how true professionals think. You, on the other hand, are
    revealing to the whole world your thoughts of a snapshooting,
    blind-following, DSLR-preaching, insecure fool.

    Go ahead, prove it some more. It's fun watching you fools continue to do
    so.
     
    NameHere, Feb 3, 2010
    #13
  14. Henry

    NameHere Guest

    They all can.
    Most do. Some zoom models have apertures as much as f/2.0. You've clearly
    never even bothered to look for yourself.
    Many do, but mostly its not necessary. Because the RAW to JPG conversion is
    done properly in the camera in the first place. RAW is only for people who
    can't expose their images properly in the first place.
    Some of them do. But since you're a machine-gunning snapshooter I suggest
    you stay with an auto-everything P&S DSLR because your camera requirements
    prove that you're not capable of using any camera in full manual modes.
    Many do, but those who use them professionally find little use for burst
    modes except for special circumstances, like hand-held bracketing
    sequences. Professionals know when to time their shots by knowing their
    subjects. Usually just one click and the deed is done.
    Yes, I can.

    And so can you if you do your own simple homework.
     
    NameHere, Feb 3, 2010
    #14
  15. Henry

    Ofnuts Guest

    *woop* *woop* Ironymeter overload!!! Replace "DSLR" by "P&S" in the
    sentence above and look in you mirror....
    So that explains why you spend so much time convincing us. Because if
    you check this forum, you alone have spent more megabytes
    boasting/trying to convince people of the superiority of P&S than any of
    the assumed DSLR minions.
    Plenty of professionals (ie, people who get paid for their pictures) use
    DSLRs. Of course you won't consider them as "true" professionnals
    because they don't use a P&S. This is just a circular argument.

    Thanks for the laugh.
     
    Ofnuts, Feb 3, 2010
    #15
  16. Henry

    NameHere Guest

    You're not too bright, are you. But then that's to be expected of everyone
    who has their head stuck in their DSLR-hole.
    Of course you've never seen one because you've never bothered to look for
    one. You have your head stuck in your DSLR-hole. If you had ever looked
    you'd find out they can be bought for less than that 50mm f1.8 lens itself.
    Doing a quick check online just now I find some used P&S cameras with f/2.0
    zoom lenses going for $50 to $200. Excellent cameras btw.
    Yet I've never seen even one HDR image that looks right, from any camera.
    You have more dynamic range with any digital camera than you've ever had
    with film for the last century. HDR is so overrated and useless. But then,
    many P&S cameras provide RAW data, so your complaint is moot.
    I guess a continuous 10 fps at full-frame size isn't fast enough for a
    machine-gunning snapshooter like yourself.
    That example is not good enough. Many P&S cameras have shutter speeds up to
    1/40,000th of a second, and that includes full-frame flash-sync if needed.
    Your image is less than child's-play in the hands of someone who knows what
    they are doing with a good P&S camera. Plus there's no shape-distortion of
    fast moving subjects by having to use an archaically slow focal-plane
    shutter with all its inherent drawbacks.

    Focal-plane shutter distortion example:

    http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/chdk/images//4/46/Focalplane_shutter_distortions.jpg
    Call me anything you want. I could care less. It's not going to change
    reality and facts.
     
    NameHere, Feb 3, 2010
    #16
  17. Henry

    NameHere Guest

    I do no such thing. I merely state the facts every time a DSLR-worshipper
    is deriding all other cameras. You don't read and comprehend very clearly
    do you. But then that's to be expected of anyone who has their mind engaged
    in blind-worship. Put some more blinders on. I don't think you've
    brainwashed yourself enough.
     
    NameHere, Feb 3, 2010
    #17
  18. Henry

    NameHere Guest

    Here's something a little more challenging for your child's-level and
    focal-plane-shutter-crippled DSLR. Physicists doing studies of magnetic
    reconnection in helium plasma at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory
    using a "lowly" Canon Powershot A700 with CHDK's ultra-fast 1/40,000 of a
    second shutter speeds. It's rather impressive.

    http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3191/3014649023_ec609452ba_o.jpg

    You can't use flash to stop an illuminated subject's motion. Only a fast
    shutter-speed can provide the images they need. A DSLR is useless to
    them--just as DSLRs are useless for many professionals who have found that
    fact out on their own for all manner of subjects. They don't sit around
    listening to DSLR-Trolls in news-groups. They're independent adults, they
    think for themselves.

    Here's a couple of other fun ones of someone playing around with a BIC
    lighter and using ultra-high shutter speeds in P&S cameras. Neither of
    which can be done by using flash to stop the motion.

    http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/chdk/images/e/ee/Bic1.jpg

    http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/chdk/images/8/87/Bic2.jpg

    The most interesting thing of all, when taking images of very fast moving
    subjects you can preview those shutter speeds in real-time in the EVF
    before you've even tripped the shutter. When taking images of a
    Dremel-drill grinding-wheel rotating at 30,000 rpm, you can see the image
    stopped in real-time as if you had used a high-speed flash, right in the
    viewfinder without even taking a picture first to see what's happening.
    It's quite amazing the first time you experience this. Your camera's
    shutter and electronic viewfinder acting as an ultra-high-speed strobe
    without any bright flashing strobe lights.

    Sorry, but yours and all others' DSLRs lose big-time if you are going to
    use shutter-speeds as any kind of selling point. It also proves how very
    useless those optical viewfinders can be in many situations.

    Thanks for bringing this up. I'm sure that many people were unaware of just
    how crippled their DSLRs truly are when compared to many other more
    inexpensive and more powerful P&S cameras.
     
    NameHere, Feb 3, 2010
    #18
  19. Hi there,
    Here's one: Canon PowerShot A590IS. I use it on full manual, which
    disables the pre-flash so I can use a cheap optical slave-trigger. Works
    fine.
    The A590 goes down to f/2.6.
    By using CHDK, I'm able to shoot RAW - altough it not that much of use
    on a P&S.
    Well, you got me here. OMG! A P&S without focus tracking and slower than
    10fps. How could they possibly dare to sell something like this for as
    much as 170 bucks new?!? (<- irony)
    Btw.: Can YOU name a DSLR, that one can easily shove into one's pocket
    (jacket, not trousers), weights under 250g (with lens)
    and costs under 170$ new? ;-)

    cu
    Michael
     
    Michael Vogel, Feb 3, 2010
    #19
  20. All it implies is that the RAW file covers a significantly wider
    dynamic range than can be expressed in a jpeg image. Which is in fact
    the case for most image sensors these days.
     
    Chris Malcolm, Feb 3, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.