More Brit anti-terror lunacy, or, why people with IQ's of 70 shouldn't carry badges
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: More Brit anti-terror lunacy, or, why people with IQ's of 70 shouldn't carry badges
Next: Image Size and Compression.
From: Bruce on 29 Jul 2010 17:38 On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:44:10 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >why people with IQ's of 70 shouldn't carry badges Or, why whining Canadians with an IQ of 70 shouldn't post about subjects they know less than nothing about.
From: Bruce on 30 Jul 2010 05:22 On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:35:46 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On Jul 29, 5:38�pm, Bruce <docnews2...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:44:10 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3...(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >why people with IQ's of 70 �shouldn't carry badges >> >> Or, why whining Canadians with an IQ of 70 shouldn't post about >> subjects they know less than nothing about. > >Awwww did the pooor widdle fewow get his feewings hurt? Your country >is getting increasing F------ up. No-one is more F------ up than you, Rich. My country is a great place to live, and I am very happy to be here. I thank God I don't live in Canada, a country whose whining people are so miserable and emigrate at such a rate that its government has no option but to encourage mass immigration. Perhaps you should emigrate too, but please don't come here!
From: RustY � on 30 Jul 2010 08:40 "Outing Trolls is FUN!" <otif(a)trollouters.org> wrote in message news:rdd456hj5uqohjaf14fo486sqffsqufvn1(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:44:10 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com> > wrote: >........................it's a real crime to > bother wasting my time on DSLRs since 2001, after I sold and gave mine > away > when I found better non-DSLR camera designs. That's interesting, my dslr outfit weighs a ton so I would like to know what to replace it with. Can you recommend something to replace my Canon and 300/2.8 that is more up to date and lighter ?
From: Outing Trolls is FUN! on 30 Jul 2010 09:20 On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:40:56 +0100, "RustY �" <No.Mail(a)All.Thanks> wrote: > >"Outing Trolls is FUN!" <otif(a)trollouters.org> wrote in message >news:rdd456hj5uqohjaf14fo486sqffsqufvn1(a)4ax.com... >> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:44:10 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: > >>........................it's a real crime to >> bother wasting my time on DSLRs since 2001, after I sold and gave mine >> away >> when I found better non-DSLR camera designs. > >That's interesting, my dslr outfit weighs a ton so I would like to know what >to replace it with. Can you recommend something to replace my Canon and >300/2.8 that is more up to date and lighter ? > > Simple. Research any and all of the superzoom cameras available from all manufacturers. Any one of them is more than any talented photographer will ever need if they are being used by capable hands. They've been beating the image quality of DSLRs (both made in the same years) for over 9 years now. Contrary to all the desperate conflict-of-interest crying that DSLR proponents relentlessly do. I've used mine for the last 9 years, from steamy swamp to mountain-top, and never has one failed to provide the images I've required. IF you know how to use them properly. Therein lies the problem. DSLR owners insist on using cameras in P&S modes only. They're nothing but crapshooters who are desperately hoping that the price of their camera will improve their photography. You need to know how to use any camera properly in any manner of manual or semi-automated modes. If you know that then NO superzoom camera available today (or for the last 9 years) will disappoint you.
From: Pete D on 31 Jul 2010 16:25
"Outing Trolls is FUN!" <otif(a)trollouters.org> wrote in message news:7ij556t7vr99pd56rt0co7tsiop1n34oh9(a)4ax.com... > On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:40:56 +0100, "RustY �" <No.Mail(a)All.Thanks> wrote: > >> >>"Outing Trolls is FUN!" <otif(a)trollouters.org> wrote in message >>news:rdd456hj5uqohjaf14fo486sqffsqufvn1(a)4ax.com... >>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:44:10 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com> >>> wrote: >> >>>........................it's a real crime to >>> bother wasting my time on DSLRs since 2001, after I sold and gave mine >>> away >>> when I found better non-DSLR camera designs. >> >>That's interesting, my dslr outfit weighs a ton so I would like to know >>what >>to replace it with. Can you recommend something to replace my Canon and >>300/2.8 that is more up to date and lighter ? >> >> > > Simple. Research any and all of the superzoom cameras available from all > manufacturers. Any one of them is more than any talented photographer will > ever need if they are being used by capable hands. They've been beating > the > image quality of DSLRs (both made in the same years) for over 9 years now. > Contrary to all the desperate conflict-of-interest crying that DSLR > proponents relentlessly do. > > I've used mine for the last 9 years, from steamy swamp to mountain-top, > and > never has one failed to provide the images I've required. IF you know how > to use them properly. Therein lies the problem. DSLR owners insist on > using > cameras in P&S modes only. They're nothing but crapshooters who are > desperately hoping that the price of their camera will improve their > photography. You need to know how to use any camera properly in any manner > of manual or semi-automated modes. If you know that then NO superzoom > camera available today (or for the last 9 years) will disappoint you. Awesome, show us some of your shots. Thanks. Pete |