Prev: 4/3rds fixed 3x zoom lens camera coming
Next: It's been a slice...
From: John Navas on 29 Jun 2010 18:58
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 10:45:41 +1200, in <i0dt2t$ka6$1(a)news.albasani.net>,
Me <user(a)domain.invalid> wrote:

>On 30/06/2010 10:11 a.m., John Navas wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:40:28 -0700 (PDT), in
>> <36c0881d-810e-4c83-b719-27fce90d1ef9(a)g19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
>> RichA<rander3127(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The Pentax KX has some great image attributes, but its build quality
>>> is toy-like. The Panasonic G2 is a horrible cost-cutting exercise,
>>> production shifted from Japan to China, kit lens debilitated, overall
>>> feel is cheaper than the excellent G1. Olympus even discontinued an
>>> MMF-1 4/3rs to m4/3rds adapter for the MMF-2, which is cheaper and has
>>> a lot more plastic. Plus, the E-PL1 is a cheap, plastic m4/3rds
>>> offering.
>>
>> There's nothing inherently wrong with plastic, often just the opposite,
>> witness the Boeing Dreamliner.

>http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/boeingaerospace/2003889663_boeing180.html

Can you say "sour grapes"?

The 777 is 10% plastic by weight.
The AV-8B Harrier is 25% plastic.
The F-22 is about 33% plastic.

--
Best regards,
John

Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer,
it makes you a dSLR owner.
"The single most important component of a camera
is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams
From: Robert Spanjaard on 29 Jun 2010 18:58
On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 15:56:45 -0700, nospam wrote:

>> And there's nothing inherently wrong with cost-cutting either. Without
>> it, Rich wouldn't even have a computer to send his endless rants from.
>
> that's not an argument for cost cutting. :)

Errr, well, WE wouldn't have computers to READ his ramblings either.

....

That doesn't sound better, does it?

--
Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com
From: Rich on 29 Jun 2010 22:15
On Jun 29, 6:58 pm, John Navas <jn...(a)navasgroup.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 10:45:41 +1200, in <i0dt2t$ka...(a)news.albasani.net>,
>
>
>
> Me <u...(a)domain.invalid> wrote:
> >On 30/06/2010 10:11 a.m., John Navas wrote:
> >> On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:40:28 -0700 (PDT), in
> >> <36c0881d-810e-4c83-b719-27fce90d1...(a)g19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
> >> RichA<rander3...(a)gmail.com>  wrote:
>
> >>> The Pentax KX has some great image attributes, but its build quality
> >>> is toy-like.  The Panasonic G2 is a horrible cost-cutting exercise,
> >>> production shifted from Japan to China, kit lens debilitated, overall
> >>> feel is cheaper than the excellent G1.  Olympus even discontinued an
> >>> MMF-1 4/3rs to m4/3rds adapter for the MMF-2, which is cheaper and has
> >>> a lot more plastic.  Plus, the E-PL1 is a cheap, plastic m4/3rds
> >>> offering.
>
> >> There's nothing inherently wrong with plastic, often just the opposite,
> >> witness the Boeing Dreamliner.
> >http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/boeingaerospace/2003889663_boei...
>
> Can you say "sour grapes"?
>
> The 777 is 10% plastic by weight.
> The AV-8B Harrier is 25% plastic.
> The F-22 is about 33% plastic.
>

Saying the Olympus E-Pl1 has the kind of plastic that the F-22 does is
like saying the F-15's titanium skin is the same as the cheap steel in
a Chinese truck toy.
From: Rich on 29 Jun 2010 22:15
On Jun 29, 6:58 pm, Robert Spanjaard <spamt...(a)arumes.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 15:56:45 -0700, nospam wrote:
> >> And there's nothing inherently wrong with cost-cutting either. Without
> >> it, Rich wouldn't even have a computer to send his endless rants from.
>
> > that's not an argument for cost cutting. :)
>
> Errr, well, WE wouldn't have computers to READ his ramblings either.
>
> ...
>
> That doesn't sound better, does it?
>
> --
> Regards, Robert                                      http://www.arumes.com

And yet....
From: Rich on 29 Jun 2010 22:34
On Jun 29, 6:11 pm, John Navas <jn...(a)navasgroup.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:40:28 -0700 (PDT), in
> <36c0881d-810e-4c83-b719-27fce90d1...(a)g19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> RichA <rander3...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >The Pentax KX has some great image attributes, but its build quality
> >is toy-like.  The Panasonic G2 is a horrible cost-cutting exercise,
> >production shifted from Japan to China, kit lens debilitated, overall
> >feel is cheaper than the excellent G1.  Olympus even discontinued an
> >MMF-1 4/3rs to m4/3rds adapter for the MMF-2, which is cheaper and has
> >a lot more plastic.  Plus, the E-PL1 is a cheap, plastic m4/3rds
> >offering.
>
> There's nothing inherently wrong with plastic, often just the opposite,
> witness the Boeing Dreamliner.
>

Theoretical discussions about plastic's integrity aside, the net
result of cost-cutting in the lesser brands is to further lower them
compared to the two top brands resulting in the two top brands become
even more popular than they are now, if that's possible.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: 4/3rds fixed 3x zoom lens camera coming
Next: It's been a slice...