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: Pete on 5 Jul 2010 17:32 On 2010-07-05 21:18:31 +0100, Neil Harrington said: > <> > The term "point-and-shoot" *is* pejorative and inappropriate for most > compact cameras today, IMO. Then answer my originally respectful question: what is the correct terminology? Telling me more of what is pejorative and inappropriate is only jarring me off. So, being jarred off: the term "DSLR" *is* pejorative and inappropriate for the users of full-frame DSLRs cameras today, more than my opinion: it is on technically delineated principles. This is absolute stupidity. It's like two owners of a Ford Focus automobile arguing in a pub: mine has a 1.6 engine, yours only has a 1.4 therefore it's pejorative and inappropriate for you to call yours a Ford Focus, you must find a more appropriate name for it. The only thing that makes all this sensible is that the manufacturers are having the last laugh. -- Pete
From: Outing Trolls is FUN! on 5 Jul 2010 17:49 On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 14:30:05 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: >On 05/07/10 1:18 PM, Neil Harrington wrote: > ><snip> > >> I agree. It's unfortunate that someone writing advertising copy for Olympus >> uses the term "point-and-shoot," but I suppose that just shows yet again how >> terminology misusage becomes popular and then practically standard usage >> through the magic of the Internet and especially Usenet, where I suspect >> most such misusage originates. > >It's not "unfortunate" it's what some marketing manager at Olympus >believed would be the best in terms of generating sales. They a) don't >want to scare off buyers that previously owned a non-ultra zoom, and b) >don't want buyers that are expecting the functionality and performance >of a D-SLR to mistakenly believe that the ultra-zooms are a D-SLR >replacement. > >> The term "point-and-shoot" *is* pejorative and inappropriate for most >> compact cameras today, IMO. > >Perhaps, but the goal here is to sell more cameras. There is a belief by >many consumers that D-SLRs are too complicated (even though of course it >can be set for automatic everything if desired). > They only seem too complicated to you. You can't even start to understand CHDK P&S cameras let alone something far simpler like a DSLR.
From: Neil Harrington on 5 Jul 2010 17:56 "Pete" <available.on.request(a)aserver.invalid> wrote in message news:2010070522325616879-availableonrequest(a)aserverinvalid... > On 2010-07-05 21:18:31 +0100, Neil Harrington said: > >> <> >> The term "point-and-shoot" *is* pejorative and inappropriate for most >> compact cameras today, IMO. > > Then answer my originally respectful question: what is the correct > terminology? Compact or ultracompact, depending on the size. Any camera that fits easily in a shirt pocket I would call an ultracompact. Otherwise, anything up to say a Coolpix 8800 in size I would call a compact. It would be ridiculous to call an 8800, which has just about every imaginable control, a P&S. There are very few digital cameras I'd call point-and-shoots, though I do have one: my first digicam, an Agfa ePhoto CL-30, bought in 1999. That really is pretty much the digital equivalent of the old 35mm P&S cameras. > Telling me more of what is pejorative and inappropriate is only jarring me > off. So, being jarred off: the term "DSLR" *is* pejorative and > inappropriate for the users of full-frame DSLRs cameras today, more than > my opinion: it is on technically delineated principles. Why? > > This is absolute stupidity. It's like two owners of a Ford Focus > automobile arguing in a pub: mine has a 1.6 engine, yours only has a 1.4 > therefore it's pejorative and inappropriate for you to call yours a Ford > Focus, you must find a more appropriate name for it. I don't follow that at all. If both are the Ford Focus model, that's what they are. We're not talking about small differences in model here, are we?
From: Peter on 5 Jul 2010 18:44 "nospam" <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message news:050720100934157149%nospam(a)nospam.invalid... > In article <9s0436hjo7s7rrnp6or68uc7988k4p901t(a)4ax.com>, John Navas > <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> Point and shoot as used here is pejorative, as I'm sure you know. > > nope. > >> Canon does not use "point and shoot" for its high-end models, only its >> lower models. Likewise Olympus. > > wrong. olympus does: > > <http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_digital.asp?section=sp> > > b&h calls them point and shoot and so does keh, as do a lot of people. > > only in your mind is it considered to be derogatory. > > you're threatened. it's clear. Oh pulese! How can Mr. never be wrong feel threatened. -- Peter
From: Peter on 5 Jul 2010 18:52
"SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message news:4c323a52$0$22163$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net... > On 05/07/10 10:34 AM, Pete wrote: >> On 2010-07-05 15:10:20 +0100, John Navas said: >> >>> "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. >> >> From what I've understood from reading several Usenet photography >> groups since last November, my initial reaction would be to disagree. >> However, you did say "here" so I stay open-minded. >> >> My perception is that hatred of DSLR owners in the various groups seems >> to be an order of magnitude worse than the pejorative remarks in the >> other direction. > > Wrong perception. There are a grand total of two people that are > pathological liars on the subject, Navas, and our favorite troll that goes > by a plethora of identities in an effort to evade everyone's kill files. > I go with you on that. I wonder if the attacks on DSLR owners are a form of penis envy. -- Peter The guy with a 3" penis will say: "size doesn't mater." |