Prev: MORE CAGED ANIMALS: Photo of The First Day of the year
Next: FastStone Image Viewer (Forgery)
From: Bowser on 3 Jan 2010 16:50
On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 08:44:52 -0500, "Larry Thong"
<larry_thong(a)shitstring.com> wrote:

>Bruce wrote:
>
>> It is possible to correct the problem by a very careful calibration of
>> the camera and lens - together. It needs to be done precisely,
>> otherwise there is a risk that it can make the problem worse. But if
>> it is done properly, it solves the problem.
>>
>> This careful calibration is time consuming and therefore the technique
>> does not suit the volume production of DSLRs.
>
>LOL!! So what you're saying is Canon can't make a dSLR system with
>interchangeable lenses that will work properly and focus correctly? I can
>put any Nikkor on my bodies and they focus perfectly every time. This is
>precious!!
>

It's also horseshit. Then again, isn't horseshit what you live in?
From: ransley on 3 Jan 2010 23:39
On Jan 3, 1:15 pm, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> ransley  <Mark_Rans...(a)Yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 2, 4:48 pm, RichA <rander3...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >> AF issues with the 7D.  Unreal.  One guy on Dpreview is on his 4th
> >> unit, which seems to be ok.  Maybe it's time for Canon to grab their
> >> ankles and license Nikon's AF technology?
>
> >>http://www.google.ca/#hl=en&q=canon+7d+af+issues&meta=&aq=0&oq=canon+...
>
> >There are too many crybabys selling this thing to get honest responses
> >here.
>
> Certainly won't get any from you.
>
> > Darwin Wiggett has an interesting review,
>
> "Interesting" in that's it's highly suspect because he uses an odd
> lens that won't do autofocus and doesn't provide any RAW images.
>
> --
> Ray Fischer        
> rfisc...(a)sonic.net  

Interesting is most if not all reviewers dont buy their test product,
it is delivered by Canon. If the major reviewers all had to purchase
the camera the complaints I can google for would be published
everywhere. Of course canon would not send perfect samples to the
reviewers and sell the public, just anything made, would they. Then
why do I read about incidents of a good one, only after many poor
units are tried.
From: Ray Fischer on 4 Jan 2010 01:39
ransley <Mark_Ransley(a)Yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Jan 3, 1:15�pm, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> ransley �<Mark_Rans...(a)Yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >On Jan 2, 4:48�pm, RichA <rander3...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> AF issues with the 7D. �Unreal. �One guy on Dpreview is on his 4th
>> >> unit, which seems to be ok. �Maybe it's time for Canon to grab their
>> >> ankles and license Nikon's AF technology?
>>
>> >>http://www.google.ca/#hl=en&q=canon+7d+af+issues&meta=&aq=0&oq=canon+...
>>
>> >There are too many crybabys selling this thing to get honest responses
>> >here.
>>
>> Certainly won't get any from you.
>>
>> > Darwin Wiggett has an interesting review,
>>
>> "Interesting" in that's it's highly suspect because he uses an odd
>> lens that won't do autofocus and doesn't provide any RAW images.
>
>Interesting is most if not all reviewers dont buy their test product,
>it is delivered by Canon. If the major reviewers all had to purchase
>the camera the complaints I can google for would be published
>everywhere. Of course canon would not send perfect samples to the
>reviewers and sell the public, just anything made, would they.

So you're saying that reviewers are all liars who don't objectively
review cameras.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer(a)sonic.net

From: ransley on 4 Jan 2010 07:32
On Jan 4, 12:39 am, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> ransley  <Mark_Rans...(a)Yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 3, 1:15 pm, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> >> ransley  <Mark_Rans...(a)Yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >On Jan 2, 4:48 pm, RichA <rander3...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> AF issues with the 7D.  Unreal.  One guy on Dpreview is on his 4th
> >> >> unit, which seems to be ok.  Maybe it's time for Canon to grab their
> >> >> ankles and license Nikon's AF technology?
>
> >> >>http://www.google.ca/#hl=en&q=canon+7d+af+issues&meta=&aq=0&oq=canon+...
>
> >> >There are too many crybabys selling this thing to get honest responses
> >> >here.
>
> >> Certainly won't get any from you.
>
> >> > Darwin Wiggett has an interesting review,
>
> >> "Interesting" in that's it's highly suspect because he uses an odd
> >> lens that won't do autofocus and doesn't provide any RAW images.
>
> >Interesting is most if not all reviewers dont buy their test product,
> >it is delivered by Canon. If the major reviewers all had to purchase
> >the camera the complaints I can google for would be published
> >everywhere. Of course canon would not send perfect samples to the
> >reviewers and sell the public, just anything made, would they.
>
> So you're saying that reviewers are all liars who don't objectively
> review cameras.
>
> --
> Ray Fischer        
> rfisc...(a)sonic.net  - Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You lack comprehension, re read what I posted, or get help.
From: Allen on 4 Jan 2010 10:38
ransley wrote:
> On Jan 4, 12:39 am, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> ransley <Mark_Rans...(a)Yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On Jan 3, 1:15 pm, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>> ransley <Mark_Rans...(a)Yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 2, 4:48 pm, RichA <rander3...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> AF issues with the 7D. Unreal. One guy on Dpreview is on his 4th
>>>>>> unit, which seems to be ok. Maybe it's time for Canon to grab their
>>>>>> ankles and license Nikon's AF technology?
>>>>>> http://www.google.ca/#hl=en&q=canon+7d+af+issues&meta=&aq=0&oq=canon+...
>>>>> There are too many crybabys selling this thing to get honest responses
>>>>> here.
>>>> Certainly won't get any from you.
>>>>> Darwin Wiggett has an interesting review,
>>>> "Interesting" in that's it's highly suspect because he uses an odd
>>>> lens that won't do autofocus and doesn't provide any RAW images.
>>> Interesting is most if not all reviewers dont buy their test product,
>>> it is delivered by Canon. If the major reviewers all had to purchase
>>> the camera the complaints I can google for would be published
>>> everywhere. Of course canon would not send perfect samples to the
>>> reviewers and sell the public, just anything made, would they.
>> So you're saying that reviewers are all liars who don't objectively
>> review cameras.
>>
>> --
>> Ray Fischer
>> rfisc...(a)sonic.net - Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> You lack comprehension, re read what I posted, or get help.
You might want to hone your writing skills to the point that your
messages are clear.
Allen
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: MORE CAGED ANIMALS: Photo of The First Day of the year
Next: FastStone Image Viewer (Forgery)