Minolta Dynax 3xi 35-70 lens on a DLSR?

Discussion in 'Minolta' started by Lordy, Mar 11, 2005.


  1. Can you say pot calling the kettle black, Bill? I didn't accuse you of an
    "anti-film bias" until after being repeatedly accused of an anti-digital
    bias. I used the exact same criteria you used to accuse me of an
    anti-digital bias to accuse you of that anti-film bias. What is good for the
    goose, is good for the gander. If you don't like being accused of things,
    stop going around accusing others.


    Thanks for posting my comments again. However, I noticed you avoided using
    Google references so others could go back and read the messages predicating
    those responses - the messages where foul language towards me was first
    used, where numerous accusations were first made concerning me, and so on.
    Of course, letting people actually read the nasty stuff written by you and
    your ilk just doesn't fit your agenda of attacking me, now does it?

    Stewart
     
    Dwight Stewart, Mar 15, 2005
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Lordy

    BillB Guest

    That's nonsense. For quite some time I avoided mentioning your
    anti-digital bias because at least for awhile you tried to present
    convincing arguments supporting your opinions. Only when the
    arguments became untenable and you studiously avoided responding to
    convincing arguments that contradicted your positions did your
    anti-digital bias become too obvious to ignore. I really don't mind
    "being accused of things", especially when they're not true. :)
    Perhaps that has something to do with your ire?

    Of course I avoided using Google references, because I never use
    Google to access newsgroups. If I didn't want anyone to be able to
    read the entire message(s) I wouldn't have included the message IDs
    now, would I? There are two ways you or anyone else can get the
    complete messages. First, (and I may have mentioned it in this ng
    several months ago), users of the Agent newsreader can double-click
    on the message ID and Agent will either open the message (if it's
    stored in another folder or has been moved to the 'trash') or if
    that fails, will download it from the newsserver if it's still
    available. A "free" version of Agent can be downloaded from
    www.forteinc.com. The second way is to ask, and I'll get the
    message and post it in its entirety, as long as the message ID is
    provided.


    [repeating the quote]:
    If you have a point to make about people using foul language, it's
    up to you, not me, to provide it. If they're in some of the
    messages I used to supply my quotes and you no longer have the
    messages, as I said, I'll quote the entire message(s), at least as
    long as they don't generate complaints from some of the reasonable
    people in this newsgroup. I don't believe that I've used any foul
    language, unless you have an aversion to the word "bloody". But in
    that case I not only used it in response to, and immediately after
    you did in a message directed to me, but quoted it later, both my
    and your use of the word. As for nastiness, that's subjective, but
    I think its safe to say that telling me that I "can go to hell" is
    nastier than anything I've said to you. That, BTW was your response
    to being called a "bloody fool". As I'm not a resident of the UK I
    have no idea what might be nasty about the word "bloody" or what the
    adjective really means (it's obviously not meant to be taken
    literally). But you've demonstrated from time to time that you can
    be quite a fool. The definitions in my rather large American
    Heritage dictionary are:
    You amply satisfy the first two definitions. The last, archaic
    definition was not what I had in mind. But the more you go on, the
    more we must wonder . . .
     
    BillB, Mar 15, 2005
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Lordy

    Mike Kohary Guest

    http://konicaminolta.com/products/consumer/digital_camera/dimage/index.html

    That page shows one digital SLR.
    I don't argue in terms of film versus digital. You do.
    No, you didn't seek us out. But I saw you arguing with Alan in the same way
    that you argue with me, and made a little joke (to Alan, not to you). It's
    your problem if you took offense to that - you bring it on yourself.
     
    Mike Kohary, Mar 16, 2005
    #23

  4. Well, certainly no big surprise there. I'm sure you believe your arguments
    are the only reasonable, convincing, ones and all who disagree just flat
    wrong. In reality, you're simply full of it and yourself, Bill.


    I'm certainly not going to waste my time reposting the messages by you and
    your supporters. If anyone wants to see your finer contributions to this
    newsgroup, they can enter this newsgroup and your names in the Google
    (www.google.com) advanced search engine.

    However, I will comment on one of my messages you quoted. The one where I
    said...

    "Well, in that case, my friend, you can go to
    hell. I'm not in this newsgroup to please you.
    I've given my opinion, and the methods used
    to arrive at that opinion, and I think most in
    this newsgroup can see that you've chosen to
    attack me instead of the substance of that. As
    such, you're nothing more than a troll in the
    same vein as others trolling this newsgroup
    in an effort to cause mischief and start
    arguments - which likely explains why you're
    in this newsgroup instead of the digital
    photography newsgroup. Enough said."

    That was written in a Febuary thread ("why digital suits me fine") where
    you had taken a previous message of mine, about computers, and reposted it
    out of context in the new thread in an attempt to prove some kind of
    anti-digital photo bias on my part. You followed that with more messages
    over a several day period where you twisted the words of that message in a
    bogus attempt to analyse my life, of which you knew nothing about and was
    really none of your business. Towards the end of that discussion, you
    posted, in a Feb 18th message...

    "My other bias could be more properly be
    described as an anti-Stewart-spin bias. If in
    my messages you've seen a bloody obvious
    anti-fim bias it's because you're a bloody
    fool."

    Only after all that did I post the paragraph above telling you to go to
    hell. And I offer no apology whatsoever for it. Instead, I still believe
    every word of the paragraph I wrote to be true. And, if subjected again to a
    several day personal attack by an ass like you, I would not hesitate to say
    the same things again. Further, if you continue to stalk me in this
    newsgroup posting unsolicited personal attacks, I will justifiably file a
    complaint with your ISP. I urge you to choose instead to end this nonsense
    here and now.

    Stewart
     
    Dwight Stewart, Mar 16, 2005
    #24
  5. Lordy

    BillB Guest

    I didn't think you'd be able to produce the foul language that you
    claimed. Responding to foolish statements is not stalking, as even
    fools might understand. And as for personal attacks, you've brought
    the 'personal' into it far more than anyone else. When you make
    patently false statements and refuse to admit that you misspoke even
    after being presented with conclusive proof, as I said, that's
    sufficient to call your statements "lies". That's not a personal
    attack, but a statement of fact. Do try to control your urges.
    Whining is counterproductive.
     
    BillB, Mar 16, 2005
    #25

  6. I've had just about enough of your foolish, childish, behavior, Bill. I
    refuse to continue to engage in discussion with someone who has repeatedly
    shown an inability to do so without personal attacks. As such, any further
    comments from you will go unanswered from this point on.

    Stewart
     
    Dwight Stewart, Mar 16, 2005
    #26
  7. Lordy

    BillB Guest

    Who's being childish? Telling a lie and being called on it is not
    a personal attack. How about accusing me of "stalking" you? Let's
    see . . . as far as I'm aware, a stalker might try to find out what
    other newsgroups you post in and follow you there. I post in a very
    small number of newsgroups and this is the only one in which I've
    ever seen your messages. I've never searched usenet (using Google
    or any other method) to discover any other newsgroups you might post
    in. I'd rather avoid you than seek you out, and the reason
    shouldn't be hard to figure out. You're well aware that I post in
    this newsgroup, and the traffic volume is low enough so that I read
    almost all messages here, and I suspect that you might do so as
    well. If you say something foolish or untrue, I'll continue to
    reply critically, but the opposite applies just as well. If you say
    something interesting or helpful I might even praise or thank you.
    I've already complimented you at least once, which I never would
    have if you were a pure troll such as UC, *me* or to a slightly
    lesser degree, Jon Pike and Unspam.

    But this is usenet after all. You should be well aware that it
    sometimes requires a thick skin to survive. This newsgroup is
    perhaps a bit unusual in that it contains practically none of the
    abusive behavior common in many other newsgroups. You seem to think
    that being called a liar is a personal attack. That depends. It
    might be if the charge is untrue. But not if the charge is true and
    you've been given ample opportunities to correct your misstatements
    but refused to. I don't doubt that you believe much of what you say
    to be true, but some of it clearly isn't, as with the $5 CDs which
    you now avoid discussing. If you check past messages, you'll see
    that several people, myself included, tried repeatedly to correct
    your untrue statements politely, without using the word "lie". But
    to no avail. Eventually your statement was seen as a lie, but for
    that you have no one to blame but yourself. That's one of the
    prices one pays for refusing to admit mistakes. Blaming others for
    taking you to task when you're so clearly wrong, so often, is not
    just a sign of (to use your words) "your foolish, childish,
    behavior". I'll leave it to you to determine what it also
    indicates. And TIA for not replying. :)
     
    BillB, Mar 16, 2005
    #27
  8. Lordy

    Mike Kohary Guest

    Bill, this is practically a guarantee he'll be responding again, isn't it?
    ;)
     
    Mike Kohary, Mar 16, 2005
    #28
  9. Lordy

    BillB Guest

    We'll see. He has had that tendency, almost as if there's a
    dominant stalking gene that can't be suppressed. Reminds me of Dr.
    Strangelove's embarrassing levitating arm. I wonder if a recent
    photo of a sewn-on star triggered or aggravated the problem. :)
     
    BillB, Mar 16, 2005
    #29

  10. Sorry, I refuse to engage in discussion with those who have, in the past,
    shown an inability to do so without personal attacks. As such, your comments
    addressed to me here will go unanswered beyond this.

    Stewart
     
    Dwight Stewart, Mar 17, 2005
    #30
  11. Lordy

    BillB Guest

    Mike was right, and you (as usual) are wrong yet again. You've
    contributed the large majority of insults and snide comments. I
    assume that telling you this also counts as a personal attack.
    If at all possible, please keep your word this time. It's
    starting to feel like I'm being stalked. :)
     
    BillB, Mar 17, 2005
    #31

  12. Sorry, I refuse to engage in discussion with those who have, in the past,
    shown an inability to do so without personal attacks. As such, your comments
    addressed to me here will go unanswered beyond this.

    Stewart
     
    Dwight Stewart, Mar 17, 2005
    #32
  13. Lordy

    Lordy Guest


    Thank you all for your replies BTW. Very informative.

    I currently have a Minolta original lens with AF 35-70 on the side, bought
    with the camera. 7D is a bit out of my pricerange in the OK (Jessops have
    it for 1000 GBP And it auctions for about 500-700 new on Ebay.

    I may have to tighten my belt or see if I can get an import. (or look for
    something else!)
     
    Lordy, Mar 21, 2005
    #33
  14. Lordy

    Lordy Guest

    Just thought, as a complete newbie in this group, that I found both Dwight
    and Alan's initial replies helpful regarding the Minolta itself.
     
    Lordy, Mar 21, 2005
    #34
    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.