What a waste these groups are...
Bertram Paul
You start talking about something trivial like card types and you get
hundreds of replies. But all are fighting each other.
It makes kinder garden look like a university!
I'm out of here.
--
---
Bertram Paul
Spamm Trappe
alt.whiner is thataway ==>>
Savageduck
Relax, enjoy it for what it is.
...but I agree there are times the digression from OP can be damaging
to the groups.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
LOL
Oh look! It's another DSLR TROLL!
You mean continuously going off-topic like that?
You useless piece of shit pretend-photographer TROLL.
LOL!!!!!!!
Savageduck
We still wait for the evidence that you even own a camera, or an image
you have created, good, mediocre or bad, if you do.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
LOL
<savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>On 2009-06-14 18:13:09 -0700, LOL <toof...@noaddress.com> said:
>
>> On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 18:03:09 -0700, Savageduck
>> <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2009-06-14 17:13:15 -0700, "Bertram Paul" <do...@mail.me> said:
>>>
>>>> You show some picture, you get none or just a few replies.
>>>>
>>>> You start talking about something trivial like card types and you get
>>>> hundreds of replies. But all are fighting each other.
>>>> It makes kinder garden look like a university!
>>>>
>>>> I'm out of here.
>>>
>>> Relax, enjoy it for what it is.
>>> ...but I agree there are times the digression from OP can be damaging
>>> to the groups.
>>
>> Oh look! It's another DSLR TROLL!
>>
>> You mean continuously going off-topic like that?
>>
>> You useless piece of shit pretend-photographer TROLL.
>>
>> LOL!!!!!!!
>
>We still wait for the evidence that you even own a camera, or an image
>you have created, good, mediocre or bad, if you do.
Oh LOOK! It's the DSLR-TROLL AGAIN!
I'm just mirroring your sickeningly childish behavior for the last how many
months. Don't you find it amusing? Everyone finds YOU so amusing! You
useless POS pretend-photographer DSLR-FUCKED-UP-TROLL.
tn...@mucks.net
wrote:
With your inability to cope, I hope you aren't checking out
completely. http://www.suicidepreventionlifeline.org/
Paul Bartram
> "Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote
> Relax, enjoy it for what it is.
> ...but I agree there are times the digression from OP can be damaging to
> the groups.
But at least there is traffic in here. several of the groups I have
frequented for years (including ones for kidney failure support and British
comedy) have virtually no posts at all, and have been dropped by many ISPs.
At least in r.p.d I can be sure of getting around 100 new headers every day,
and if some of them are just arguments between two people, those are easily
identified and ignored.
Paul
** Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you got till it's gone...**
~Big Yellow Taxi - Joni Mitchell
daveFaktor
Well Bert... I hate to be the only one to point this out to you but...
rec.photo.digital.slr-systems, is an open forum for the
discussion of digital SLR (single lens reflex) camera systems.
These systems consist of:
- Digital SLR (DSLR) camera bodies with mounts for detachable lenses
- Lenses for those cameras.
"rec.photo digital group is for the discussion of all aspects of digital
photography, including digital cameras, scanners, image manipulation
software, printers, and CD-ROM technology. All postings made to this
group should conform to existing Usenet guidelines (see
news.announce.newusers for guideline documents). This group explicitly
prohibits the posting of commercial advertisments or other promotional
material, whether or not it is an any way related to photography.
Hey mate... How hard is it for you to figure out that whilst posting
links to photos in either of these groups has never bothered anyone, it
is strictly speaking it is *OFF TOPIC!* in the groups you are posting
your happy snaps to.
You've been cross posting links to commercial sites claiming to offer
tutorials when the topic line suggests (I never visited any) that you
are pumping a commercial site of your own!
Bert... Your loss to these groups will be noticed for about as long as
it takes for a bucket of water to settle after a stone is dropped in it.
There are plenty of groups dedicated to photography on Usenet.
(Alt.photography is one) where you could post your links and get
comments - maybe sniggers.
But don't get the sulks and go away... Just go away. Or... You could
stay and discover your photos are as mundane as everyone elses and start
talking about what these groups are set up for. And FFS stop cross posting.
Rich
Kindergarten
I don't mind responding to pictures, but what I HATE is when some
ass---- says, "Look at this image" then directs you to a whole page of
images, or pages, (just to pump up their site hit rates) rather than
the specific image.
M.
> I'm out of here.
Pete D
"Bertram Paul" <do...@mail.me> wrote in message
news:eYqdnTVDj83pD6jX...@novis.pt...
Gee I wonder who you will be next week?
Alan Browne
OK.
(I only protest when quality posters leave).
Frank ess
See, M., you need to learn to read subtext. He didn't want you to
understand he was going to leave; he'd like to have less reason to
leave, and was willing to have anyone interested join a discussion
about it, perhaps even to the extent he is dissuaded.
Speak to the point; OK? Oh, you're part of the point? Conceded.
My view: a newsgroup is what you make of it. If you respond to trolls,
it becomes at least partly a respond-to-trolls group, to the delight
of trolls. If it becomes a check-out-my-latest-sock group, they'll be
lining up for attention. If it becomes
my-excuse-for-throwing-my-weight-and-or-intellect-(if any)-around
group, boredom and disdain will ensue. If it becomes a
hardcore-photography-information-and-decent-evaluation-of-equipment-and-work
group, the dips**ts will discover it and convert it to something a lot
more like their favorites. Count on it.
Such is Usenet.
"We become just by the practice of just actions,
self-controlled by exercising self-control,
and courageous by performing acts of courage."
--Aristotle
--
Frank ess
Allen
intellect around id inversely proportional to the value of that "intellect".
Allen
Twibil
>
> > "We become just by the practice of just actions,
> > self-controlled by exercising self-control,
> > and courageous by performing acts of courage."
> > --Aristotle
>
> A very good post. I must add one thing to it--the degree of throwing
Er, so you're discounting the value of Philosophers such as Aristotle
(see above) who were in fact famed for doing exactly that: "throwing
their intellect around".
How strange, then, that you think it was a good post...
Frank ess
Q.E.D.
Bob Larter
At long last, he's posted a link:
<http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3398/3629777547_e63d510046.jpg>
Unsurprisingly, it's an average snapshot.
--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
ASAAR
> At long last, he's posted a link:
> <http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3398/3629777547_e63d510046.jpg>
> Unsurprisingly, it's an average snapshot.
With EXIF data stripped out, probably to hide the camera used. :)
Frank ess
Hey! That looks like one of /my/ masterpieces!
--
Frank ess
ASAAR
>>> At long last, he's posted a link:
>>> <http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3398/3629777547_e63d510046.jpg>
>>> Unsurprisingly, it's an average snapshot.
>>
>> With EXIF data stripped out, probably to hide the camera used. :)
>
> Hey! That looks like one of /my/ masterpieces!
What a tangled web you weave . . .
:)
Turning a Light On the Roaches
I guess you missed the part where it was originally called a scrapshot to
begin with.
Interesting, that the usual resident-trolls would extract that link from
the text that explains it and talk about it in another thread. How else
then could they use if for their more-immature-than-a-child comments?
For those of you that missed the accompanying text, here it is from the
other thread:
>Oh what the hell, let's entertain the trolls. Here's one of my scrapshots
>(meaning not anywhere near good enough for commercial use, the only kind I
>will ever rarely post to the net a few times a year). Don't bother to zoom
>in looking for details. I use a lot of downsizing and extra-high JPG
>compression, enough to destroy all details so nobody can use these photos
>for anything of importance.
>
>http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3398/3629777547_e63d510046.jpg
And ...
>I failed to mention some important things which may not be apparent to you
>at first. DSLRs will be unable able to capture these web-rainbow photos
>properly. The lighting conditions in which they need to be shot preclude
>the use of very small apertures needed in ALL DSLRs for enough DOF. At the
>small apertures required by a DSLR for enough DOF you'll need to use
>flash--instantly destroying the very lighting that causes this effect. A
>P&S camera does not have these huge drawbacks. If using a DSLR you cannot
>line up the angle of the web to the camera in a flat plane to get enough in
>focus while getting any kind of decent composition, while also making sure
>the angle of the sun is where you need it to be and still see and
>photograph the refraction rainbows. The most you will ever hope for with
>any DSLR is to get a few strands in focus that will show one color at best,
>all the rest being just a huge smear of out of focus blobs, never being
>able to focus on the large expanse that shows all the hues of the rainbow
>at once. Which is precisely what makes the sight so spectacular in the
>first place. Otherwise it's not even worth photographing.
>Here's a good example of someone attempting this with a DSLR, the best I
>could find.
>
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/11957541@N08/1198711037
>
>I found a lot of great shots online of rainbow-refracting webs from P&S
>cameras (many of them far better than the example scrapshot that I posted,
>that's why it's a scrapshot), but this is all I could find from a DSLR user
>that was good enough. None of the rainbow-hued strands are in focus.
>Smearily artistic perhaps, but not a good representation of nature and the
>awe inspiring sight you are trying to capture. If they align the DSLR to
>get a flatter plane and get more in focus then they lose the rainbows. Been
>there, done that. A waste of time and effort, and a total waste of the
>thousands of dollars spent on the camera and lenses you'll need in
>attempting to do so.
>
>Sorry, no DSLR on earth will ever cut it for decent macro
>nature-photography. No matter what all the DSLR-Trolls in newsgroups might
>whine about to the contrary.
>
>They know not of what they speak. None of them have ever used any of the
>cameras that they cry about in real-world nature photography shooting
>conditions or they'd instantly know better. This is precisely how I know
>that they are pretend-photographer DSLR-Trolls and nothing more than that,
>nor will they ever be more than that.
Neil Ellwood
>> We still wait for the evidence that you even own a camera, or an image
>> you have created, good, mediocre or bad, if you do.
>
> At long last, he's posted a link:
> <http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3398/3629777547_e63d510046.jpg>
> Unsurprisingly, it's an average snapshot.
I couldn't see it 'photo unavailable'.
--
Neil
reverse ra and delete l
Linux user 335851
ASAAR
>> At long last, he's posted a link:
>> <http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3398/3629777547_e63d510046.jpg>
>> Unsurprisingly, it's an average snapshot.
>
> I couldn't see it 'photo unavailable'.
Yes. I had it still in a browser window and tested it by
'refreshing' the image and it was replaced by the error message. It
was just a very small, unremarkable image of a spider's web that
contained no EXIF data. Hmm, now we won't be able to track our
cowardly anti-DSLR sock puppet troll to his lair. Maybe "he" is
more of a Shelob like "she". :)
LOL
Oh LOOK! The pretend-photographer DSLR-TROLL is stalking someone again!
What a surprise!
These permanent resident-trolls are so much fun to play with. Like poking
Weebles when bored.
LOL!!
John Navas
in <eYqdnTVDj83pD6jX...@novis.pt>:
Understandable, because names notwithstanding, these really aren't
"photography" groups, they are *camera* groups, dominated by wannabes
who mistakenly think great photographs are made by great cameras, rather
than great photographers.
Buying a Nikon doesn't make you a photographer. It makes you a Nikon
owner. ~Author Unknown
The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches
behind it. ~Ansel Adams
A photograph is usually looked at - seldom looked into. ~Ansel Adams
There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good
photographs. ~Ansel Adams
A good photograph is knowing where to stand. ~Ansel Adams
Every time someone tells me how sharp my photos are, I assume that it
isn't a very interesting photograph. If it were, they would have more to
say. ~Author Unknown
Actually, I'm not all that interested in the subject of photography.
Once the picture is in the box, I'm not all that interested in what
happens next. Hunters, after all, aren't cooks. ~Henri Cartier-Bresson
The photograph itself doesn't interest me. I want only to capture a
minute part of reality. ~Henri Cartier Bresson
A Ming vase can be well-designed and well-made and is beautiful for that
reason alone. I don't think this can be true for photography. Unless
there is something a little incomplete and a little strange, it will
simply look like a copy of something pretty. We won't take an interest
in it. ~John Loengard, "Pictures Under Discussion"
Your Camera Doesn't Matter, by Ken Rockwell
<http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm>
--
Best regards,
John
Panasonic DMC-FZ28 (and several others)
Alan Browne
"A book of quotations is a good thing for an uneducated man to have."
- (or words to that effect), Winston Churchill.
--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.
saywhat
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>"A book of quotations is a good thing for an uneducated man to have."
> - (or words to that effect), Winston Churchill.
It's good that you have yours then.
Alan Browne
Who needs one? There are quotations abounding on the net. But for the
above, I didn't look it up. Too easy to remember, if not to the letter.
Savageduck
> Savageduck wrote:
>> On 2009-06-14 18:13:09 -0700, LOL <toof...@noaddress.com> said:
>>
>>> On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 18:03:09 -0700, Savageduck
>>> <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2009-06-14 17:13:15 -0700, "Bertram Paul" <do...@mail.me> said:
>>>>
>>>>> You show some picture, you get none or just a few replies.
>>>>>
>>>>> You start talking about something trivial like card types and you get
>>>>> hundreds of replies. But all are fighting each other.
>>>>> It makes kinder garden look like a university!
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm out of here.
>>>>
>>>> Relax, enjoy it for what it is.
>>>> ...but I agree there are times the digression from OP can be damaging
>>>> to the groups.
>>>
>>> Oh look! It's another DSLR TROLL!
>>>
>>> You mean continuously going off-topic like that?
>>>
>>> You useless piece of shit pretend-photographer TROLL.
>>>
>>> LOL!!!!!!!
>>
>> We still wait for the evidence that you even own a camera, or an image
>> you have created, good, mediocre or bad, if you do.
>
> At long last, he's posted a link:
> <http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3398/3629777547_e63d510046.jpg>
> Unsurprisingly, it's an average snapshot.
Oh! You mean the one that is unavailable?
--
Regards,
Savageduck
Bob Larter
> On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 21:24:38 -0700, "Frank ess" <fr...@fshe2fs.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> ASAAR wrote:
>>> On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 12:30:24 +1000, Bob Larter wrote:
>>>
>>>> At long last, he's posted a link:
>>>> <http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3398/3629777547_e63d510046.jpg>
>>>> Unsurprisingly, it's an average snapshot.
>>> With EXIF data stripped out, probably to hide the camera used. :)
>> Hey! That looks like one of /my/ masterpieces!
>
> I guess you missed the part where it was originally called a scrapshot to
> begin with.
>
> Interesting, that the usual resident-trolls would extract that link from
> the text that explains it and talk about it in another thread. How else
> then could they use if for their more-immature-than-a-child comments?
>
> For those of you that missed the accompanying text, here it is from the
> other thread:
>
>> Oh what the hell, let's entertain the trolls. Here's one of my scrapshots
>> (meaning not anywhere near good enough for commercial use, the only kind I
>> will ever rarely post to the net a few times a year). Don't bother to zoom
>> in looking for details. I use a lot of downsizing and extra-high JPG
>> compression, enough to destroy all details so nobody can use these photos
>> for anything of importance.
>>
>> http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3398/3629777547_e63d510046.jpg
In other words, you haven't got any good shots to show us.
John Navas
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in
<itudnetbuu69pqXX...@giganews.com>:
>On 16-06-09 20:28, saywhat wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:06:20 -0400, Alan Browne
>> <alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> "A book of quotations is a good thing for an uneducated man to have."
>>> - (or words to that effect), Winston Churchill.
>>
>> It's good that you have yours then.
>
>Who needs one? There are quotations abounding on the net. But for the
>above, I didn't look it up. Too easy to remember, if not to the letter.
Too lazy to get it right. Why am I not surprised.
Bob Larter
So he's pulled it? I guess he was embarrassed by it.
Fetch Boy Fetch - Now Roll-Over
wrote:
YEah, that musta been why I bet! You're so smart! Whatta good boy you are!
You're so cute. That'sa good boy. Here's your half a biscuit. Now go lay
down where you belong, on your rug in the basement again.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(Watchin' 'em jump, I figure IQs of under 85 for all resident-trolls, at
least that low, probably much less, has to be, even a brighter dog would
have figured things out long ago, the more stupid cat, no, a few dogs, yes.
LOL!)
John Navas
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in
<itudnetbuu69pqXX...@giganews.com>:
>On 16-06-09 20:28, saywhat wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:06:20 -0400, Alan Browne
>> <alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> "A book of quotations is a good thing for an uneducated man to have."
>>> - (or words to that effect), Winston Churchill.
>>
>> It's good that you have yours then.
>
>Who needs one? There are quotations abounding on the net. But for the
>above, I didn't look it up. Too easy to remember, if not to the letter.
Actually:
"It is a good thing for an uneducated man to read a book of quotations."
-Winston Churchill
You're welcome for the book. ;)
Chris Malcolm
> Savageduck wrote:
>> On 2009-06-14 18:13:09 -0700, LOL <toof...@noaddress.com> said:
>>
>>> On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 18:03:09 -0700, Savageduck
>>> <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2009-06-14 17:13:15 -0700, "Bertram Paul" <do...@mail.me> said:
>>>>
>>>>> You show some picture, you get none or just a few replies.
>>>>>
>>>>> You start talking about something trivial like card types and you get
>>>>> hundreds of replies. But all are fighting each other.
>>>>> It makes kinder garden look like a university!
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm out of here.
>>>>
>>>> Relax, enjoy it for what it is.
>>>> ...but I agree there are times the digression from OP can be damaging
>>>> to the groups.
>>>
>>> Oh look! It's another DSLR TROLL!
>>>
>>> You mean continuously going off-topic like that?
>>>
>>> You useless piece of shit pretend-photographer TROLL.
>>>
>>> LOL!!!!!!!
>>
>> We still wait for the evidence that you even own a camera, or an image
>> you have created, good, mediocre or bad, if you do.
> At long last, he's posted a link:
> <http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3398/3629777547_e63d510046.jpg>
> Unsurprisingly, it's an average snapshot.
What's more important is that as presented, small and compressed etc.,
it fails to illustrate his point about the capture of the myriad
glittering colours. He also later gives a pointer to a DSLR image to
show how bad they are the task. Unfortunately it's a slightly larger
image, enough larger to do the job better than the tiny dull snap he
posted.
It takes a special kind of conviction to post evidence in support of
your much repeated grandiose claims which actually contradicts you!
It's called pathological delusion.
--
Chris Malcolm
LOL
I see ... so because an image is LARGER that means it is BETTER. LOL! How
thick are those coke-bottle-bottom glasses of yours? Anyone with even the
most average of eyesight could have seen the bands of rainbows in that web.
It was downsized and compressed just to the point so as not to destroy that
completely. It was posted only to show how much of the web can easily be
captured in focus with any P&S camera to faithfully record the effect,
something that no DSLR will ever do. NOT to entertain your desperate need
to see "purty pichers of reality while living in your mommy's basement".
But then again, you're over a day late and you never saw it. So ...
>
>It takes a special kind of conviction to post evidence in support of
>your much repeated grandiose claims which actually contradicts you!
>It's called pathological delusion.
Over a day late for you to have even seen the long-gone photo for which you
are now inventing comments. Who is pathological? My how you do project. You
should get a job in a movie theatre. Though I doubt the patrons would
appreciate their scenes so distorted and blurry as you would provide to
their screens.
LOL!!!!!!!!
Pete D
"LOL" <toof...@noaddress.com> wrote in message
news:9mgh35prhredufdp3...@4ax.com...
So this means that you admit to not being about to use a decent camera
properly and use a P&S to justify your existence, good for you, excellent
choice, keep up the great work.
Alan Browne
> So this means that you admit to not being about to use a decent camera
> properly and use a P&S to justify your existence, good for you, excellent
> choice, keep up the great work.
I get all choked up when members here have correctly diagnosed
somebody's issues and wish them well along their best path.
Thanks Pete.
Troll Killer
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>On 18-06-09 16:56, Pete D wrote:
>
>> So this means that you admit to not being about to use a decent camera
>> properly and use a P&S to justify your existence, good for you, excellent
>> choice, keep up the great work.
>
>I get all choked up when members here have correctly diagnosed
>somebody's issues and wish them well along their best path.
>
>Thanks Pete.
Dear Resident, Pretend-Photographer, DSLR-Trolls,
Your reply is completely off-topic. Here are some (new & improved) topics
that befit these newsgroups. Please consider them for future discussions
and
posts:
1. P&S cameras can have more seamless zoom range than any DSLR glass in
existence. (E.g. 9mm f2.7 - 1248mm f/3.5.) There are now some excellent
wide-angle and telephoto (telextender) add-on lenses for many makes and
models of P&S cameras. Add either or both of these small additions to your
photography gear and, with some of the new super-zoom P&S cameras, you can
far surpass any range of focal-lengths and apertures that are available or
will ever be made for larger format cameras.
2. P&S cameras can have much wider apertures at longer focal lengths than
any DSLR glass in existence. (E.g. 549mm f/2.4 and 1248mm f/3.5) when used
with high-quality telextenders, which do not reduce the lens' original
aperture one bit. Following is a link to a hand-held taken image of a 432mm
f/3.5 P&S lens increased to an effective 2197mm f/3.5 lens by using two
high-quality teleconverters. To achieve that apparent focal-length the
photographer also added a small step of 1.7x digital zoom to take advantage
of the RAW sensor's slightly greater detail retention when upsampled
directly in the camera for JPG output. As opposed to trying to upsample a
JPG image on the computer where those finer RAW sensor details are already
lost once it's left the camera's processing. (Digital-zoom is not totally
empty zoom, contrary to all the net-parroting idiots online.) A HAND-HELD
2197mm f/3.5 image from a P&S camera (downsized only, no crop):
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3141/3060429818_b01dbdb8ac_o.jpg Note that
any in-focus details are cleanly defined to the corners and there is no CA
whatsoever. If you study the EXIF data the author reduced contrast and
sharpening by 2-steps, which accounts for the slight softness overall. Any
decent photographer will handle those operations properly in editing with
more powerful tools and not allow a camera to do them for him. A full f/3.5
aperture achieved at an effective focal-length of 2197mm (35mm equivalent).
Only DSLRs suffer from loss of aperture due to the manner in which their
teleconverters work. P&S cameras can also have higher quality full-frame
180-degree circular fisheye and intermediate super-wide-angle views than
any DSLR and its glass for far less cost. Some excellent fish-eye adapters
can be added to your P&S camera which do not impart any chromatic
aberration nor edge softness. When used with a super-zoom P&S camera this
allows you to seamlessly go from as wide as a 9mm (or even wider) 35mm
equivalent focal-length up to the wide-angle setting of the camera's own
lens.
3. P&S smaller sensor cameras can and do have wider dynamic range than
larger sensor cameras E.g. a 1/2.5" sized sensor can have a 10.3EV Dynamic
Range vs. an APS-C's typical 7.0-8.0EV Dynamic Range. One quick example:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3142/2861257547_9a7ceaf3a1_o.jpg
4. P&S cameras are cost efficient. Due to the smaller (but excellent)
sensors used in many of them today, the lenses for these cameras are much
smaller. Smaller lenses are easier to manufacture to exacting curvatures
and are more easily corrected for aberrations than larger glass used for
DSLRs. This also allows them to perform better at all apertures rather than
DSLR glass which usually performs well at only one aperture setting per
lens. Side by side tests prove that P&S glass can out-resolve even the best
DSLR glass ever made. See this side-by-side comparison for example
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_PowerShot_SX10_IS/outdoor_results.shtml
When adjusted for sensor size, the DSLR lens is creating 4.3x's the CA that
the P&S lens is creating, and the P&S lens is resolving almost 10x's the
amount of detail that the DSLR lens is resolving. A difficult to figure 20x
P&S zoom lens easily surpassing a much more easy to make 3x DSLR zoom lens.
After all is said and done you will spend anywhere from 1/10th to 1/50th
the price on a P&S camera that you would have to spend in order to get
comparable performance in a DSLR camera. To obtain the same focal-length
ranges as that $340 SX10 camera with DSLR glass that *might* approach or
equal the P&S resolution, it would cost over $6,500 to accomplish that (at
the time of this writing). This isn't counting the extra costs of a
heavy-duty tripod required to make it functional at those longer
focal-lengths and a backpack to carry it all. Bringing that DSLR investment
to over 20 times the cost of a comparable P&S camera. When you buy a DSLR
you are investing in a body that will require expensive lenses, hand-grips,
external flash units, heavy tripods, more expensive larger filters, etc.
etc. The outrageous costs of owning a DSLR add up fast after that initial
DSLR body purchase. Camera companies count on this, all the way to their
banks.
5. P&S cameras are lightweight and convenient. With just one P&S camera
plus one small wide-angle adapter and one small telephoto adapter weighing
just a couple pounds, you have the same amount of zoom range as would
require over 15 pounds of DSLR body + lenses. The P&S camera mentioned in
the previous example is only 1.3 lbs. The DSLR + expensive lenses that
*might* equal it in image quality comes in at 9.6 lbs. of dead-weight to
lug around all day (not counting the massive and expensive tripod, et.al.)
You can carry the whole P&S kit + accessory lenses in one roomy pocket of a
wind-breaker or jacket. The DSLR kit would require a sturdy backpack. You
also don't require a massive tripod. Large tripods are required to
stabilize the heavy and unbalanced mass of the larger DSLR and its massive
lenses. A P&S camera, being so light, can be used on some of the most
inexpensive, compact, and lightweight tripods with excellent results.
6. P&S cameras are silent. For the more common snap-shooter/photographer,
you will not be barred from using your camera at public events,
stage-performances, and ceremonies. Or when trying to capture candid shots
you won't so easily alert all those within a block around, by the obnoxious
clattering noise that your DSLR is making, that you are capturing anyone's
images. For the more dedicated wildlife photographer a P&S camera will not
endanger your life when photographing potentially dangerous animals by
alerting them to your presence.
7. Some P&S cameras can run the revolutionary CHDK software on them, which
allows for lightning-fast motion detection (literally, lightning fast 45ms
response time, able to capture lightning strikes automatically) so that you
may capture more elusive and shy animals (in still-frame and video) where
any evidence of your presence at all might prevent their appearance.
Without the need of carrying a tethered laptop along or any other hardware
into remote areas--which only limits your range, distance, and time
allotted for bringing back that one-of-a-kind image. It also allows for
unattended time-lapse photography for days and weeks at a time, so that you
may capture those unusual or intriguing subject-studies in nature. E.g. a
rare slime-mold's propagation, that you happened to find in a
mountain-ravine, 10-days hike from the nearest laptop or other time-lapse
hardware. (The wealth of astounding new features that CHDK brings to the
creative-table of photography are too extensive to begin to list them all
here. See http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK )
8. P&S cameras can have shutter speeds up to 1/40,000th of a second. See:
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CameraFeatures Allowing you to capture fast
subject motion in nature (e.g. insect and hummingbird wings) WITHOUT the
need of artificial and image destroying flash, using available light alone.
Nor will their wing shapes be unnaturally distorted from the focal-plane
shutter distortions imparted in any fast moving objects, as when
photographed with all DSLRs. (See focal-plane-shutter-distortions
example-image link in #10.)
9. P&S cameras can have full-frame flash-sync up to and including
shutter-speeds of 1/40,000th of a second. E.g.
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Samples:_High-Speed_Shutter_%26_Flash-Sync
without the use of any expensive and specialized focal-plane shutter
flash-units that must pulse their light-output for the full duration of the
shutter's curtain to pass slowly over the frame. The other downside to
those kinds of flash units is that the light-output is greatly reduced the
faster the shutter speed. Any shutter speed used that is faster than your
camera's X-Sync speed is cutting off some of the flash output. Not so when
using a leaf-shutter. The full intensity of the flash is recorded no matter
the shutter speed used. Unless, as in the case of CHDK capable cameras
where the camera's shutter speed can even be faster than the lightning-fast
single burst from a flash unit. E.g. If the flash's duration is 1/10,000 of
a second, and your CHDK camera's shutter is set to 1/20,000 of a second,
then it will only record half of that flash output. P&S cameras also don't
require any expensive and dedicated external flash unit. Any of them may be
used with any flash unit made by using an inexpensive slave-trigger that
can compensate for any automated pre-flash conditions. Example:
http://www.adorama.com/SZ23504.html
10. P&S cameras do not suffer from focal-plane shutter drawbacks and
limitations. Causing camera shake, moving-subject image distortions
(focal-plane-shutter distortions, e.g.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/chdk/images//4/46/Focalplane_shutter_distortions.jpg
do note the distorted tail-rotor too and its shadow on the ground,
90-degrees from one another), last-century-slow flash-sync, obnoxiously
loud slapping mirrors and shutter curtains, shorter mechanical life, easily
damaged, expensive repair costs, etc.
11. When doing wildlife photography in remote and rugged areas and harsh
environments; or even when the amateur snap-shooter is trying to take their
vacation photos on a beach or dusty intersection on some city street;
you're not worrying about trying to change lenses in time to get that shot
(fewer missed shots), dropping one in the mud, lake, surf, or on concrete
while you do; and not worrying about ruining all the rest of your photos
that day from having gotten dust & crud on the sensor. For the adventurous
photographer you're no longer weighed down by many many extra pounds of
unneeded glass, allowing you to carry more of the important supplies, like
food and water, allowing you to trek much further than you've ever been
able to travel before with your old D/SLR bricks.
12. Smaller sensors and the larger apertures available at longer
focal-lengths allow for the deep DOF required for excellent
macro-photography when using normal macro or tele-macro lens arrangements.
All done WITHOUT the need of any image destroying, subject irritating,
natural-look destroying flash. No DSLR on the planet can compare in the
quality of available-light macro photography that can be accomplished with
nearly any smaller-sensor P&S camera. (To clarify for DSLR owners/promoters
who don't even know basic photography principles: In order to obtain the
same DOF on a DSLR you'll need to stop down that lens greatly. When you do
then you have to use shutter speeds so slow that hand-held
macro-photography, even in full daylight, is all but impossible. Not even
your highest ISO is going to save you at times. The only solution for the
DSLR user is to resort to artificial flash which then ruins the subject and
the image; turning it into some staged, fake-looking, studio setup.)
13. P&S cameras include video, and some even provide for CD-quality stereo
audio recordings, so that you might capture those rare events in nature
where a still-frame alone could never prove all those "scientists" wrong.
E.g. recording the paw-drumming communication patterns of eusocial-living
field-mice. With your P&S video-capable camera in your pocket you won't
miss that once-in-a-lifetime chance to record some unexpected event, like
the passage of a bright meteor in the sky in daytime, a mid-air explosion,
or any other newsworthy event. Imagine the gaping hole in our history of
the Hindenberg if there were no film cameras there at the time. The mystery
of how it exploded would have never been solved. Or the amateur 8mm film of
the shooting of President Kennedy. Your video-ready P&S camera being with
you all the time might capture something that will be a valuable part of
human history one day.
14. P&S cameras have 100% viewfinder coverage that exactly matches your
final image. No important bits lost, and no chance of ruining your
composition by trying to "guess" what will show up in the final image. With
the ability to overlay live RGB-histograms, and under/over-exposure area
alerts (and dozens of other important shooting data) directly on your
electronic viewfinder display you are also not going to guess if your
exposure might be right this time. Nor do you have to remove your eye from
the view of your subject to check some external LCD histogram display,
ruining your chances of getting that perfect shot when it happens.
15. P&S cameras can and do focus in lower-light (which is common in natural
settings) than any DSLRs in existence, due to electronic viewfinders and
sensors that can be increased in gain for framing and focusing purposes as
light-levels drop. Some P&S cameras can even take images (AND videos) in
total darkness by using IR illumination alone. (See: Sony) No other
multi-purpose cameras are capable of taking still-frame and videos of
nocturnal wildlife as easily nor as well. Shooting videos and still-frames
of nocturnal animals in the total-dark, without disturbing their natural
behavior by the use of flash, from 90 ft. away with a 549mm f/2.4 lens is
not only possible, it's been done, many times, by myself. (An interesting
and true story: one wildlife photographer was nearly stomped to death by an
irate moose that attacked where it saw his camera's flash come from.)
16. Without the need to use flash in all situations, and a P&S's nearly
100% silent operation, you are not disturbing your wildlife, neither
scaring it away nor changing their natural behavior with your existence.
Nor, as previously mentioned, drawing its defensive behavior in your
direction. You are recording nature as it is, and should be, not some
artificial human-changed distortion of reality and nature.
17. Nature photography requires that the image be captured with the
greatest degree of accuracy possible. NO focal-plane shutter in existence,
with its inherent focal-plane-shutter distortions imparted on any moving
subject will EVER capture any moving subject in nature 100% accurately. A
leaf-shutter or electronic shutter, as is found in ALL P&S cameras, will
capture your moving subject in nature with 100% accuracy. Your P&S
photography will no longer lead a biologist nor other scientist down
another DSLR-distorted path of non-reality.
18. Some P&S cameras have shutter-lag times that are even shorter than all
the popular DSLRs, due to the fact that they don't have to move those
agonizingly slow and loud mirrors and shutter curtains in time before the
shot is recorded. In the hands of an experienced photographer that will
always rely on prefocusing their camera, there is no hit & miss
auto-focusing that happens on all auto-focus systems, DSLRs included. This
allows you to take advantage of the faster shutter response times of P&S
cameras. Any pro worth his salt knows that if you really want to get every
shot, you don't depend on automatic anything in any camera.
19. An electronic viewfinder, as exists in all P&S cameras, can accurately
relay the camera's shutter-speed in real-time. Giving you a 100% accurate
preview of what your final subject is going to look like when shot at 3
seconds or 1/20,000th of a second. Your soft waterfall effects, or the
crisp sharp outlines of your stopped-motion hummingbird wings will be 100%
accurately depicted in your viewfinder before you even record the shot.
What you see in a P&S camera is truly what you get. You won't have to guess
in advance at what shutter speed to use to obtain those artistic effects or
those scientifically accurate nature studies that you require or that your
client requires. When testing CHDK P&S cameras that could have shutter
speeds as fast as 1/40,000th of a second, I was amazed that I could
half-depress the shutter and watch in the viewfinder as a Dremel-Drill's
30,000 rpm rotating disk was stopped in crisp detail in real time, without
ever having taken an example shot yet. Similarly true when lowering shutter
speeds for milky-water effects when shooting rapids and falls, instantly
seeing the effect in your viewfinder. Poor DSLR-trolls will never realize
what they are missing with their anciently slow focal-plane shutters and
wholly inaccurate optical viewfinders.
20. P&S cameras can obtain the very same bokeh (out of focus foreground and
background) as any DSLR by just increasing your focal length, through use
of its own built-in super-zoom lens or attaching a high-quality telextender
on the front. Just back up from your subject more than you usually would
with a DSLR. Framing and the included background is relative to the subject
at the time and has nothing at all to do with the kind of camera and lens
in use. Your f/ratio (which determines your depth-of-field), is a
computation of focal-length divided by aperture diameter. Increase the
focal-length and you make your DOF shallower. No different than opening up
the aperture to accomplish the same. The two methods are identically
related where DOF is concerned.
21. P&S cameras will have perfectly fine noise-free images at lower ISOs
with just as much resolution as any DSLR camera. Experienced Pros grew up
on ISO25 and ISO64 film all their lives. They won't even care if their P&S
camera can't go above ISO400 without noise. An added bonus is that the P&S
camera can have larger apertures at longer focal-lengths than any DSLR in
existence. The time when you really need a fast lens to prevent
camera-shake that gets amplified at those focal-lengths. Even at low ISOs
you can take perfectly fine hand-held images at super-zoom settings.
Whereas the DSLR, with its very small apertures at long focal lengths
require ISOs above 3200 to obtain the same results. They need high ISOs,
you don't. If you really require low-noise high ISOs, there are some
excellent models of Fuji P&S cameras that do have noise-free images up to
ISO1600 and more.
22. Don't for one minute think that the price of your camera will in any
way determine the quality of your photography. Any of the newer cameras of
around $100 or more are plenty good for nearly any talented photographer
today. IF they have talent to begin with. A REAL pro can take an award
winning photograph with a cardboard Brownie Box Camera made a century ago.
If you can't take excellent photos on a P&S camera then you won't be able
to get good photos on a DSLR either. Never blame your inability to obtain a
good photograph on the kind of camera that you own. Those who claim they
NEED a DSLR are only fooling themselves and all others. These are the same
people that buy a new camera every year, each time thinking, "Oh, if I only
had the right camera, a better camera, better lenses, faster lenses, then I
will be a great photographer!" If they just throw enough money at their
hobby then the talent-fairy will come by one day, after just the right
offering to the DSLR gods was made, and bestow them with something that
they never had in the first place--talent. Camera company's love these
people. They'll never be able to get a camera that will make their
photography better, because they never were a good photographer to begin
with. They're forever searching for that more expensive camera that might
one day come included with that new "talent in a box" feature. The irony is
that they'll never look in the mirror to see what the real problem has been
all along. They'll NEVER become good photographers. Perhaps this is why
these self-proclaimed "pros" hate P&S cameras so much. P&S cameras
instantly reveal to them their piss-poor photography skills. It also
reveals the harsh reality that all the wealth in the world won't make them
any better at photography. It's difficult for them to face the truth.
23. Have you ever had the fun of showing some of your exceptional P&S
photography to some self-proclaimed "Pro" who uses $30,000 worth of camera
gear. They are so impressed that they must know how you did it. You smile
and tell them, "Oh, I just use a $150 P&S camera." Don't you just love the
look on their face? A half-life of self-doubt, the realization of all that
lost money, and a sadness just courses through every fiber of their being.
Wondering why they can't get photographs as good after they spent all that
time and money. Get good on your P&S camera and you too can enjoy this fun
experience.
24. Did we mention portability yet? I think we did, but it is worth
mentioning the importance of this a few times. A camera in your pocket that
is instantly ready to get any shot during any part of the day will get more
award-winning photographs than that DSLR gear that's sitting back at home,
collecting dust, and waiting to be loaded up into that expensive back-pack
or camera bag, hoping that you'll lug it around again some day.
25. A good P&S camera is a good theft deterrent. When traveling you are not
advertising to the world that you are carrying $20,000 around with you.
That's like having a sign on your back saying, "PLEASE MUG ME! I'M THIS
STUPID AND I DESERVE IT!" Keep a small P&S camera in your pocket and only
take it out when needed. You'll have a better chance of returning home with
all your photos. And should you accidentally lose your P&S camera you're
not out $20,000. They are inexpensive to replace.
There are many more reasons to add to this list but this should be more
than enough for even the most unaware person to realize that P&S cameras
are just better, all around. No doubt about it.
The phenomenon of the pretend-photographer usenet trolls yelling "You NEED
a DSLR!" can be summed up in just one short phrase:
"If even 5 billion people are saying and doing a foolish thing, it remains
a foolish thing."
Pete D
"Alan Browne" <alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:pNSdnUXXkb8WNqfX...@giganews.com...
> On 18-06-09 16:56, Pete D wrote:
>
>> So this means that you admit to not being about to use a decent camera
>> properly and use a P&S to justify your existence, good for you, excellent
>> choice, keep up the great work.
>
> I get all choked up when members here have correctly diagnosed somebody's
> issues and wish them well along their best path.
>
> Thanks Pete.
>
Pete D
same Sig, what were you thinking dude? You will have to conecntrate a bit
better in future or we will stop laughing at you, oh and best if you use all
caps we will get your ideas better that way.
Keep up the good work by the way.
Cheers.
Pete
Robert Coe
: You show some picture, you get none or just a few replies.
:
: You start talking about something trivial like card types and you get
: hundreds of replies. But all are fighting each other.
: It makes kinder garden look like a university!
:
: I'm out of here.
Good riddance.
Troll Killer
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>On 18-06-09 16:56, Pete D wrote:
>
>> So this means that you admit to not being about to use a decent camera
>> properly and use a P&S to justify your existence, good for you, excellent
>> choice, keep up the great work.
>
>I get all choked up when members here have correctly diagnosed
>somebody's issues and wish them well along their best path.
>
>Thanks Pete.
Dear Resident, Pretend-Photographer, DSLR-Troll,
Pete D
> The phenomenon of the pretend-photographer usenet trolls yelling "You NEED
> a DSLR!" can be summed up in just one short phrase:
>
> "If even 5 billion people are saying and doing a foolish thing, it remains
> a foolish thing."
Interestingly I see no one actually doing this, just one twat yelling "A P&S
CAN DO EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE ELSE IS A WANKER", good for you, do what
makes you happy mate.
Cheers and keep up the good work you are keeping us amused.
Pete