How to tell a rank amateur from a seasoned one, or a pro
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Winter is near
Next: CMOS sensors worthless for video?
From: nospam on 5 Jul 2010 11:22 In article <a2p3365iqrp51sl6hcj2j9di6gr8bjoiqt(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >What do you mean by the lag of a camera, don;t you realise there's many > >areas where lag can be accumulated. > > For course. Much depends on how the camera is configured, and on the > skill of the user. lag is not a function of the user's skill. the camera is either fast or it's not. how well a user can deal with a slow camera may involve skill (and a little bit of luck too). > >For me there are many areas of lag, one I eliminated wass by not usiong a > >lens cap when I was ready to take photos, another was focusing before I take > >the shot, rather than just before I take the shot. > > Sure. I likewise configure my camera appropriately when shooting fast > action, with settings I've stored in a custom configuration that can be > set with a twist of the mode dial. That's Fast Focus mode for most > cases, although I sometimes switch to Continuous Focus or Manual Focus > (pre-focus) when it makes more sense to do so. in other words, you have a number of workarounds for limitations of the camera. > This is the kind of thing known only to people who have actually used a > given camera enough to know how to use it well. Those like Steven who > rely only on what they read on the Internet are thus easily mistaken > about the true capabilities of a camera, as is painfully obvious from > all the mistakes he posts to Usenet. > > But even just a half-press of the shutter button in preparation for a > shot will pre-focus any decent camera, avoiding any focus lag when the > shot is taken, which even Steven should know, so there really is no > excuse for his statements. what was that you like to say about attacking the man?
From: nospam on 5 Jul 2010 11:34 In article <jqp336pm2j077tides4a13jl308lgrcohm(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> it was pointed out to him that pretty much everyone calls non-dslrs > >> point and shoot cameras, including stores who sell them and even the > >> manufacturers of the cameras themselves. it's common usage of the term. > >> > >> none of that mattered to him. he called it a pejorative, which meant it > >> gave him an exit strategy. it's one of his usual tactics. > > > >Thanks, I hadn't realized that. > > "Point and shoot" is a pejorative when applied to high-end bridge > cameras here, and "pretty much everyone" is a wild exaggeration, as I'm > sure you know. wrong, no matter how hard you try to rationalize it. you must be really threatened. b&h photo, one of the largest if not *the* largest worldwide seller of photo equipment, classifies digital cameras into three categories, point & shoot, slr and mirrorless system cameras for the latest large sensor compacts, a category that didn't exist until recently. <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Digital-Cameras/ci/991/N/4291645412> olympus calls their own cameras 'feature rich point and shoot cameras.' it's hardly pejorative when the maker themselves use the term. <http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_digital.asp?section=sp>
From: John McWilliams on 5 Jul 2010 11:59 nospam wrote: > In article <jqp336pm2j077tides4a13jl308lgrcohm(a)4ax.com>, John Navas > <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >>>> it was pointed out to him that pretty much everyone calls non-dslrs >>>> point and shoot cameras, including stores who sell them and even the >>>> manufacturers of the cameras themselves. it's common usage of the term. >>>> >>>> none of that mattered to him. he called it a pejorative, which meant it >>>> gave him an exit strategy. it's one of his usual tactics. >>> Thanks, I hadn't realized that. >> "Point and shoot" is a pejorative when applied to high-end bridge >> cameras here, and "pretty much everyone" is a wild exaggeration, as I'm >> sure you know. > > wrong, no matter how hard you try to rationalize it. > > you must be really threatened. > > b&h photo, one of the largest if not *the* largest worldwide seller of > photo equipment, classifies digital cameras into three categories, > point & shoot, slr and mirrorless system cameras for the latest large > sensor compacts, a category that didn't exist until recently. > > <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Digital-Cameras/ci/991/N/4291645412> > > olympus calls their own cameras 'feature rich point and shoot cameras.' > it's hardly pejorative when the maker themselves use the term. > > <http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_digital.asp?section=sp> You're right, but it's perjorative to John. I've been writing "compact" for a while. It doesn't hurt. -- john mcwilliams
From: John McWilliams on 5 Jul 2010 12:01 Ray Fischer wrote: > John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote: >>> >> Q.E.D. > > You're just annoyed that I dared to point out that you defend trolls. Hardly, Ray. I point out that you feed the trolls, swear at them, tell them to go away, AND: It only makes them stick around more. That's my point, full stop. -- john mcwilliams
From: John Navas on 5 Jul 2010 12:15
On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 08:59:36 -0700, in <i0svh9$554$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote: >nospam wrote: >> In article <jqp336pm2j077tides4a13jl308lgrcohm(a)4ax.com>, John Navas >> <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >> >>>>> it was pointed out to him that pretty much everyone calls non-dslrs >>>>> point and shoot cameras, including stores who sell them and even the >>>>> manufacturers of the cameras themselves. it's common usage of the term. >>>>> >>>>> none of that mattered to him. he called it a pejorative, which meant it >>>>> gave him an exit strategy. it's one of his usual tactics. >>>> Thanks, I hadn't realized that. >>> "Point and shoot" is a pejorative when applied to high-end bridge >>> cameras here, and "pretty much everyone" is a wild exaggeration, as I'm >>> sure you know. >> >> wrong, no matter how hard you try to rationalize it. >> >> you must be really threatened. >> >> b&h photo, one of the largest if not *the* largest worldwide seller of >> photo equipment, classifies digital cameras into three categories, >> point & shoot, slr and mirrorless system cameras for the latest large >> sensor compacts, a category that didn't exist until recently. >> >> <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Digital-Cameras/ci/991/N/4291645412> >> >> olympus calls their own cameras 'feature rich point and shoot cameras.' >> it's hardly pejorative when the maker themselves use the term. >> >> <http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_digital.asp?section=sp> > >You're right, but it's perjorative to John. I've been writing "compact" >for a while. It doesn't hurt. Point and shoot as used here is pejorative, as I'm sure you know. Canon does not use "point and shoot" for its high-end models, only its lower models. Likewise Olympus. Nikon uses the term "digital compact cameras". Pansonic uses the term "digital camera". etc. etc. -- John "Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive, difficult to redirect, awe inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." --Gene Spafford |