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: Neil Harrington on 8 Jul 2010 00:09 "tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:gho936d9ku19e06iohvd7mrffna3jabi1a(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 7 Jul 2010 16:18:03 -0400, "Neil Harrington" > <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: > >> >>My objection is that it stands for "point and shoot," which does not >>properly describe most of the cameras one sees referenced in that way. > > Can you not point and shoot with a p&s camera? A compact you mean? Sure, and you can point and shoot with a D3 as well. No one calls the latter a P&S though.
From: Ben Dover on 8 Jul 2010 00:09 On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 00:07:30 -0400, tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >On Wed, 7 Jul 2010 23:43:18 -0400, "Neil Harrington" ><nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: > >>If I want to speed up I step on the gas. Foot off the gas and it goes back >>to the cruise control setting, unless I've done something to change it. >>Slowing down for a slower car in front of me I use the brake, which also >>disengages the cruise control. Every car I've owned with cruise control has >>worked that way. The only time I use the + and - buttons is to set or >>resume, or *rarely* to make small adjustments to the speed setting. You must >>do an awful lot of button pushing if you do as you say. > >In our cars, foot on the gas while on cruise control speeds up the >car, and the car goes back to the set speed when the foot is removed. >To go slower, there's a button for (I think it's labeled) "coast". >Release that and the car resumes the set speed. However, I usually >tap the brake to slow and then re-set. > >I wouldn't comment on John's car. Obviously, unless one has driven >John's make, model, and his personal car, one shouldn't. Obviously, since you are comparing your own limited skills with your own devices YOU shouldn't be comparing your limitations with anyone else's expertise.
From: Outing Trolls is FUN! on 8 Jul 2010 00:11 On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 00:05:46 -0400, "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: > >They are handy when one needs a compact camera with a wide range of focal >lengths without carrying anything beside the camera itself, and THERE WILL >BE PLENTY OF LIGHT. You don't have much skills with cameras, do you. More than obvious from this comment of yours.
From: John Navas on 8 Jul 2010 00:46 On Wed, 7 Jul 2010 23:43:18 -0400, in <Eb-dnceG5oPA1KjRnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: >"John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message >news:9g9a36h5q6dkt0271eesd0412tsc9ffcuc(a)4ax.com... >> For you. Not for me. You're trying to project your limitations onto >> everyone else again. > >It isn't a question of my "limitations." I believe anyone would find a >manual zoom easier, faster and more accurate to use than any motorized zoom, >regardless of his experience with the latter. For me it works fine. For you it doesn't. Nothing more to be said. End of story. >> You're obviously unfamiliar with the FZ28. The zoom control is a single >> two-speed rotary switch around the shutter button. No zoom pushbuttons >> whatsoever. Will you now be big enough to admit your mistake? > >Yes, of course. I've been talking about pushbuttons and thinking of that >arrangement only, since most of my compact cameras use buttons for zooming. >When you mentioned "multi-speed rotary control" I thought you meant >something like Minolta's briefly marketed motorized "zooms" (actually >varifocals) for their SLRs, which had a zoom control around the lens that >looked like a manual control, but wasn't. > >My FZ35 has the same two-speed rotary control around the shutter release as >your FZ28. I had frankly forgotten about that, not having used the camera >for some time. Unfortunately, as Watergate conspirator H.R. Haldeman famously said, �You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.� It's too late to claim you really do know your camera when you've made such a basic mistake about how it works. Since you don't even know your own camera terribly well, much less mine, it's not terribly surprising you have trouble with the non-"pushbutton" power zoom. >> We obviously do. I use cruise control to both speed up and slow down, >> fine adjusting the speed of the vehicle, much more precise and simple >> that disengaging the cruise control to use the accelerator pedal. >> For me, that is. Not apparently for you. > >If I want to speed up I step on the gas. Foot off the gas and it goes back >to the cruise control setting, unless I've done something to change it. >Slowing down for a slower car in front of me I use the brake, which also >disengages the cruise control. Every car I've owned with cruise control has >worked that way. The only time I use the + and - buttons is to set or >resume, or *rarely* to make small adjustments to the speed setting. You must >do an awful lot of button pushing if you do as you say. Nope. Just the occasional fine adjustment. Perhaps I'm just a less aggressive driver than you are. But this has nothing to do with photography, so this is all I'm going to say about it. >> Except it's not. You've admitted to zero experience with the FZ28, and > >Yes. Zero experience with the FZ28 and not really a lot with the FZ35 >either. But it is still practically the same as the FZ28. If you think it's >not, tell me what you think the important differences are. I've not used the FZ35 enough to have a meaningful opinion. >> Varifocal also makes more sophisticated optics possible, enabling sharp > >Not "more sophisticated," just more compact. Not having to be parfocal >allows a much simpler design. There have been small 35mm cameras with >four-element zoom lenses, an amazing simplification. That's a red herring. As you ought to know, Panasonic superzooms actually have complex, sophisticated lens designs. >> images with minimal distortion over very long zoom ranges. It's a huge >> advantage -- there are no comparable lenses for dSLR cameras at any >> price. > >That is entirely because of the difference in format sizes. ... Your opinion, Not mine. We'll just have to agree to disagree. >I have a 15x zoom lens for my DX Nikons -- compares well with the >tiny-format superzooms, considering the format difference, and I'd put it up >against any of them for definition and low distortion. Sorry, but not even close. >> Been there; done that; > >No, as a matter of fact, you have not. I've asked the question several times >and you have always declined to answer it. I've repeatedly answered you. You just don't like the answers. >> and growing very tired of your endless attempt to >> blame *my* equipment, which works just fine for me, for *your* own >> limitations. > >I'm hardly "blaming" your equipment, John. OK, then you're making disparaging characterizations about a camera with which you have no actual experience. >I like the FZ35 myself as I've >mentioned a number of times, and surely would like your FZ28 too since the >FZ35 appears to be a slightly improved version of the same camera. As I have >said, there's little apparent difference between them. You keep insisting >that there must be some important difference, though what that might be you >evidently cannot say. Correct. Unlike you, I won't rely on guesswork and 2nd-hand information. I can speak to the differences between the FZ28 and several prior models based on a great deal of actual experience, but not the FZ35. -- John "Facts? We ain't got no facts. We don't need no facts. I don't have to show you any stinking facts!" [with apologies to John Huston]
From: nospam on 8 Jul 2010 00:57
In article <kria369g7rfe0lqo09ca3a0u7kluihvb9t(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >It isn't a question of my "limitations." I believe anyone would find a > >manual zoom easier, faster and more accurate to use than any motorized zoom, > >regardless of his experience with the latter. > > For me it works fine. For you it doesn't. > Nothing more to be said. End of story. your standards are lower. > >> Varifocal also makes more sophisticated optics possible, enabling sharp > > > >Not "more sophisticated," just more compact. Not having to be parfocal > >allows a much simpler design. There have been small 35mm cameras with > >four-element zoom lenses, an amazing simplification. > > That's a red herring. As you ought to know, Panasonic superzooms > actually have complex, sophisticated lens designs. as *you* ought to know, all modern lenses are complex and sophisticated, not just panasonic. |