If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
On 29 Aug 2005 11:10:01 -0700, "
wrote: RichA blathers: I don't...But it's up to you to prove, because you're the one making the allegation. It depends to on how the camera body is designed. No, it depends on _you_ conducting the test. The Canon in question seemed to have been designed like a race car, to channel impact energy across the body, saving the occupants inside. The camera was a total loss. It would almost certainly have been a total loss had it been made of metal, plastic, or even popsicle sticks. Your complaints started out as stupid, but are now just plain idiotic to the extreme. You are so upset because the lowest-of-the-low lenses at Canon are slightly worse that the junk-lenses at Nikon. Oh, the horror of it all! Now you kvetch that when you drop a camera 30m, it, like, BREAKS, and maybe a metal camera would break ever so less, therefore "plastic stinks". Basically, you are a FUDster. A rather dumb one, it would appear, but still a FUDster. As far as the lenses are concerned, Olympus's "low end" 40-150 zoom basically wasted the competition from all commers in a recent test and Nikon's ED kit zooms are much better than Canon's non-ED zoom. Now I'm seeing Canon's WA lenses are nothing much either, "L" series or not. As witnessed by one of the sample images from the D5 images on dpreview.com. This say alot. As for the post about the plastic Canon disintingrating on impact, you could be right or wrong about your conclusions as to what kind of damage a body can take. What I DO know is I once dropped an all metal Olympus OM-1 from 10 feet onto concrete and it ended up with a ding in the prism housing, which didn't displace the prism and had no effect on the camera's performance. Try it with a D-Rebel and see if you don't crack the body, which would basically ruin the camera. No cheating by landing the camera on it's lens though. -Rich "Bittorrents are REFUNDS for all the BAD movie products Hollywood never gave us refunds for in the past" |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
In message , RichA
writes On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 23:19:17 -0400, "Michael Johnson, PE" wrote: RichA wrote: On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 20:43:40 -0400, "Michael Johnson, PE" wrote: RichA wrote: No wonder I hate it so much. http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/47959941 Take all the plastic out of your day to day life and then tell us how much you hate it. Oh I realize how it's made things cheap enough for most people to afford, but some things could be made of metal instead (like camera bodies). However, I wouldn't expect my 19" $700 monitor to have a stainless steel or magnesium chassis. Any DSLR has a good bit of plastic in it. I don't understand what there is to "hate" about it. Actually I bet the P&S cameras are more metal as a total percentage than a DSLR. Depends on the P&S and the DSLR. My C8080 is mostly metal. Things that are not are the battery door, the connection covers, and the popup flash. The rest is magnesium and aluminum. I think most DSLRs have metal chassis, if not metal outer coverings. -Rich I was walking on Dartmoor this afternoon with the very plastic 350D with a 17-40 lens on a strap over my shoulder. I slipped and fell. The camera swung round on the strap and hit a granite boulder with what sounded like a very expensive crunch. Whilst my leg and arm were receiving some attention I checked the camera. It had struck the rock at the corner between the base and the a/v sockets and also at the lens hood. Apart from a couple of marks in the plastic there is nothing wrong with it. A metal casing would probably fared just as well but it appears that plastic will stand up to a fair bit of mistreatment. -- Robert |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 07:49:25 GMT, "Pete D" wrote:
"dylan" wrote in message ... "Frank ess" wrote in message ... Skip M wrote: "RichA" wrote in message ... No wonder I hate it so much. http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/47959941 "Bittorrents are REFUNDS for all the BAD movie products Hollywood never gave us refunds for in the past" Tell you what, Rich, drop your camera, what ever it is, nine stories onto concrete or rocks, and then post a photo of the result... "Stories" do not equal "feet". C'mon; someone keeps reminding us this is a "technical forum". Joke-ish. 90ft = approx 9 stories or 10* Stories = feet As long as Rich is still holding onto the camera I am pretty sure everyone will be happy with the result. Only a rabid Canon supporter would go "down with the camera." -Rich "Bittorrents are REFUNDS for all the BAD movie products Hollywood never gave us refunds for in the past" |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
RichA wrote:
No, it depends on _you_ conducting the test. The Canon in question seemed to have been designed like a race car, to channel impact energy across the body, saving the occupants inside. The camera was a total loss. It would almost certainly have been a total loss had it been made of metal, plastic, or even popsicle sticks. Your complaints started out as stupid, but are now just plain idiotic to the extreme. You are so upset because the lowest-of-the-low lenses at Canon are slightly worse that the junk-lenses at Nikon. Oh, the horror of it all! Now you kvetch that when you drop a camera 30m, it, like, BREAKS, and maybe a metal camera would break ever so less, therefore "plastic stinks". Basically, you are a FUDster. A rather dumb one, it would appear, but still a FUDster. As far as the lenses are concerned, Olympus's "low end" 40-150 zoom basically wasted the competition from all commers in a recent test and Nikon's ED kit zooms are much better than Canon's non-ED zoom. Now I'm seeing Canon's WA lenses are nothing much either, "L" series or not. As witnessed by one of the sample images from the D5 images on dpreview.com. This say alot. Canon wide-angle performance problems have been known for a _long_ time. Where have you been? Right: comparing the smell of brand X dog**** to brand Y dog****. I would ask "why", but I am not particularly interested in your scatological fascinations... As for the post about the plastic Canon disintingrating on impact, you could be right or wrong about your conclusions as to what kind of damage a body can take. What I DO know is I once dropped an all metal Olympus OM-1 from 10 feet onto concrete and it ended up with a ding in the prism housing, which didn't displace the prism and had no effect on the camera's performance. Documentary evidence of this claim is ... where? Try it with a D-Rebel and see if you don't crack the body, which would basically ruin the camera. Why should I try anything? You are the one making the (idiot) claims. Go ahead, take your "OM-1" and drop it from 90 feet and get back to us with the result. No cheating by landing the camera on it's lens though. Why don't you try thinking instead of acting as a particularly dumb FUDster? It is fun, and in fact, it is easier. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
In message ,
"Darrell" wrote: hmmmm, if you fell off of a 9 story building would you want to land on 10' of plastic peanuts, or 10' of metal bolts of similar size What about 10' of solid plastic, vs 10' of steel wool? -- John P Sheehy |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 04:14:38 -0400, RichA wrote:
No wonder I hate it so much. http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/47959941 "Bittorrents are REFUNDS for all the BAD movie products Hollywood never gave us refunds for in the past" Flesh appears to have some drawbacks as well: http://www.latimes.com/travel/outdoo...ck=1&cset=true Hiker dies posing for photo at Yosemite Joe Robinson IT'S the hard-won payoff for a vertical Sierra hike: a stomach-dropping overlook from a cliff-side perch, captured for posterity with a photo. But a snapshot with too much of an edge can turn fatal, as it did last week for an Irish student who fell to his death from Upper Yosemite Fall. Dublin resident Shane Kinsella, 21, who had hiked to the top of Yosemite National Park's famed waterfall with friends, was posing for a picture at the edge of the falls when he slipped and fell 1,430 feet over the precipice. His body was recovered in a pool at the base of the falls. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
"RichA" wrote in message ... snip 10* Stories = feet I thought ten stories equaled an anthology. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
RichA wrote: On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 05:19:13 -0700, "Skip M" wrote: "RichA" wrote in message .. . No wonder I hate it so much. http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/47959941 "Bittorrents are REFUNDS for all the BAD movie products Hollywood never gave us refunds for in the past" Tell you what, Rich, drop your camera, what ever it is, nine stories onto concrete or rocks, and then post a photo of the result... Not a good test. A camera could fall many different ways and end up in many different "shapes" after the fall. But I doubt it would "explode." -Rich "Bittorrents are REFUNDS for all the BAD movie products Hollywood never gave us refunds for in the past" Drop it in a minefield? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Plastic vs metal lens mount | Sheldon | Digital SLR Cameras | 13 | July 5th 05 09:01 PM |
Cheap black plastic frame needed in bulk | jray75 | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | February 10th 05 04:46 PM |
20D just loves the plastic lens! | Ryadia | Digital Photography | 33 | October 18th 04 05:35 PM |
Plastic tripod mounts on cameras | What's In A Name? | Digital Photography | 7 | September 16th 04 02:40 AM |
sunpak 4000af , plastic prisma | johan wenall | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | January 3rd 04 05:51 PM |