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: Savageduck on 6 Jul 2010 03:31 On 2010-07-05 23:48:54 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> said: > In article <i0uijd$nn$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, David J Taylor > <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: > >> There's only one person who objects to "P&S" - the rest of us are quite >> happy! I own both and have no problem with the term. > > who cares what it's called. people know what is meant by p&s and slr > and that's all that matters. language evolves. the whole pejorative > nonsense is his way of arguing, particularly when his position is weak. Just what is objectional and pejorative about the term "Pocketable & Small"? -- Regards, Savageduck
From: Die Wahrheit on 6 Jul 2010 04:17 On 6 Jul 2010 08:10:51 -0000, JustBCause <justbcause(a)i.can> wrote: >On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 00:53:09 -0400, "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet(a)cox.net> >wrote: > >>On 7/6/2010 12:07 AM, Mike Russell wrote: >>> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 21:43:51 -0500, Die Wahrheit wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 21:30:38 -0500, Allen<allent(a)austin.rr.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Naturally, the subject rapidly turned to equipment, which may or may not >>>>> identify amateur vs. pro. >>>>> The best way to tell is this: the amateur is the one who is smiling and >>>>> appears to be enjoying him/herself. >>>>> Allen >>>> >>>> The amateur just does it more often. The fool, all the time. The true Pro >>>> only when it really matters to the art of photography. Their joy now being >>>> 100-fold that of the amateur or fool. Greater views for greater enjoyment >>>> require more challenging climbs. >>> >>> Or a helicopter. >> >>The true pro doesn't give a hoot in Hell about art, he's in it for the >>money. > >Obviously you're not one. > This comes as no surprise, to anyone.
From: John Navas on 6 Jul 2010 10:13 On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 15:51:22 -0400, in <zuWdnRc_Rohdqq_RnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: >"John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message >news:mmuu26l5i77o3n7vleav547rqvcs1nirv3(a)4ax.com... >I have the FZ35 which seems almost identical to the FZ28. I like the camera >a lot, within its limitations, but it's just nonsensical to compare its >zooming qualities with the ease, speed and accuracy of a manual zoom lens on >a DSLR. To you. Not to me, and to others like me who have learned how to use the power zoom effectively and comfortably. For us, zooming isn't an issue -- it's only an issue to those who haven't learned how to use it effectively and comfortably. p.s. The FZ35 is not "almost identical" to the FZ28 -- it has significant differences as well as significant similarities -- you cannot make valid judgments of one from the other. -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]
From: John Navas on 6 Jul 2010 10:15 On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 09:35:40 -0700, in <i0t1ks$dgk$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote: >John Navas wrote: >> 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: > >>>> >>>> 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. > >Some use it that way, most do not, I am sure. Most by number of posts. I've counted. ;) >I started using "compact" >in deference to your view, besides which it's shorter to type. Good for you. -- John "There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves." -Will Rogers
From: John Navas on 6 Jul 2010 10:16
On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 18:44:36 -0400, in <4c32607f$0$5549$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >"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. 'Those who have evidence will present their evidence, whereas those who do not have evidence will attack the man.' -- John "Never argue with an idiot. He'll drag you down to his level and then beat you with experience." -Dr. Alan Zimmerman |