R.P.D. reorg passes, use r.p.d.slr-systems

Helge Nareid wrote:

What I would like to see, however, is much less postings on digital
cameras on _this_ group, which after all is a film group and always
has been.

Pigs will fly by in super-sonic formation, a parade of unicorns will
materialize on Main Street dancing the macarena, and George W. Bush
will form a cogent, polysyllabilic answer to a simple question. If we
wish hard enough, all of these things can come true! Everyone! Hold
hands, form a circle, and _WISH_!!!

Helge Nareid wrote:

What I would like to see, however, is much less postings on digital
cameras on _this_ group, which after all is a film group and always
has been.


1) Many of the digital postings here are legitimate, eg: talking about a 70-200
f/2.8 lens for a Canon EOS 1v or for a 20D amounts much to the same thing.

2) r.p.d is cluttered with discussions that range all over the place and it is
a PITA to wade through, hence...

3) r.p.d.slr was suggested as a place that would be welcoming to those rpd users
who want to focus on SLR type cameras and to those rpe35mm users who are more
interested in digital than film.

So, what you would like to see will likely evolve from the recent process of
creating the new groups...

Cheers,
Alan



--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

Helge Nareid wrote:
What I would like to see, however, is much less postings on digital
cameras on _this_ group, which after all is a film group and always
has been.

Not really -- there is rec.photo.film+labs for film and lab processing
and rec.photo.darkroom for do-it-yourself.

Alan Browne wrote:
2) r.p.d is cluttered with discussions that range all over the place
and it is a PITA to wade through, hence...

Has it gotten any better? Anybody try to follow it? Perhaps Lisa Horton
reads that group only, because I haven't seen anything here by her lately.
Anyway, I have no interest in digicams, only DSLRs, so the new newsgroup
r.p.d.slr-systems comes at a good time.

Bill Tuthill wrote in
:

Anyway, I have no interest in digicams, only DSLRs, so the new newsgroup
r.p.d.slr-systems comes at a good time.

I see that you are a Supernews subscriber. They should have it on your
server within a few days.

--
Bill

Bill Tuthill wrote:


Has it gotten any better? Anybody try to follow it? Perhaps Lisa Horton
reads that group only, because I haven't seen anything here by her lately.
Anyway, I have no interest in digicams, only DSLRs, so the new newsgroup
r.p.d.slr-systems comes at a good time.


I skim throught it quickly on occasion and only jump in when I see something of
real interest. I just don't have time to wade throught the headers.



--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

Alan Browne wrote:

I skim throught it quickly on occasion and only jump in when I see something of
real interest. I just don't have time to wade throught the headers.


Presumably that's because you are far too busy boring people to death
here on r.p.e.35mm.

;-)

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 10:17:08 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

Helge Nareid wrote:

What I would like to see, however, is much less postings on digital
cameras on _this_ group, which after all is a film group and always
has been.


1) Many of the digital postings here are legitimate, eg: talking about a 70-200
f/2.8 lens for a Canon EOS 1v or for a 20D amounts much to the same thing.

This is true for some, but by no means for all of the cross-posted
messages, even if we ignore the "BORING IDIOTS LOVE THE 20D !!!"
threads (which I do).

2) r.p.d is cluttered with discussions that range all over the place and it is
a PITA to wade through, hence...

Which is no excuse at all for posting in an inappropriate group.

3) r.p.d.slr was suggested as a place that would be welcoming to those rpd users
who want to focus on SLR type cameras and to those rpe35mm users who are more
interested in digital than film.

I hope that will be the case - as a matter of fact I expect that the
rec.photo.digital.slr-systems will be the only useful group of the new
groups. Two of the others are IMHO badly named with ill-defined target
groups (r.p.d.zlr and r.p.d.point+shoot), and the rangefinger group
targets a type of camera which has barely started to emerge from the
vapourware stages, and is IMHO unlikely to ever be a major player in
the digital marketplace.

And yes, I did argue those points in the discussion phase, and I voted
accordingly.

So, what you would like to see will likely evolve from the recent process of
creating the new groups...

I wish I could be as optimistic as you ...

--
- Helge Nareid
Nordmann i utlendighet, Aberdeen, Scotland
For e-mail, please use my initials with the same domain as the posted address

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 10:17:08 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

Helge Nareid wrote:

What I would like to see, however, is much less postings on digital
cameras on _this_ group, which after all is a film group and always
has been.


1) Many of the digital postings here are legitimate, eg: talking about a 70-200
f/2.8 lens for a Canon EOS 1v or for a 20D amounts much to the same thing.

This is true for some, but by no means for all of the cross-posted
messages, even if we ignore the "BORING IDIOTS LOVE THE 20D !!!"
threads (which I do).

2) r.p.d is cluttered with discussions that range all over the place and it is
a PITA to wade through, hence...

Which is no excuse at all for posting in an inappropriate group.

3) r.p.d.slr was suggested as a place that would be welcoming to those rpd users
who want to focus on SLR type cameras and to those rpe35mm users who are more
interested in digital than film.

I hope that will be the case - as a matter of fact I expect that the
rec.photo.digital.slr-systems will be the only useful group of the new
groups. Two of the others are IMHO badly named with ill-defined target
groups (r.p.d.zlr and r.p.d.point+shoot), and the rangefinger group
targets a type of camera which has barely started to emerge from the
vapourware stages, and is IMHO unlikely to ever be a major player in
the digital marketplace.

And yes, I did argue those points in the discussion phase, and I voted
accordingly.

So, what you would like to see will likely evolve from the recent process of
creating the new groups...

I wish I could be as optimistic as you ...

--
- Helge Nareid
Nordmann i utlendighet, Aberdeen, Scotland
For e-mail, please use my initials with the same domain as the posted address

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:33:28 -0000, Bill Tuthill wrote:

Helge Nareid wrote:
What I would like to see, however, is much less postings on digital
cameras on _this_ group, which after all is a film group and always
has been.

Not really -- there is rec.photo.film+labs for film and lab processing
and rec.photo.darkroom for do-it-yourself.

Oh dear, I guess I'll have to go into pedant mode:

This group is about cameras and equipment using 35mm _film_ and always
has been.

--
- Helge Nareid
Nordmann i utlendighet, Aberdeen, Scotland
For e-mail, please use my initials with the same domain as the posted address

Helge Nareid wrote:

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 10:17:08 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

3) r.p.d.slr was suggested as a place that would be welcoming to those rpd users
who want to focus on SLR type cameras and to those rpe35mm users who are more
interested in digital than film.


I hope that will be the case - as a matter of fact I expect that the
rec.photo.digital.slr-systems will be the only useful group of the new
groups. Two of the others are IMHO badly named with ill-defined target
groups (r.p.d.zlr and r.p.d.point+shoot), and the rangefinger group


..zlr was reached after a couple weeks discussion on the news.groups ...it was
the least of various evils.

..point+shoot is fine, IMO.

..rangefinder is fine too, but I feel it would have been best included within slr
a la rpe35mm.

targets a type of camera which has barely started to emerge from the
vapourware stages, and is IMHO unlikely to ever be a major player in
the digital marketplace.

....and what may well happen is the .rangefinder people will mainly hang out at
..slr-systems as that most closely resembles the performance that they are
looking for. Many of the P&S cameras are very close to RF's in design ... but
have attrociously small sensors ... something a Leicaphile would not care to put
behind his lovely lenses...

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--