Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon

DD (Rox) wrote:
In article 2fI3f.1674$UF4.484@fed1read02, "Mark²" mjmorgan(lowest
even number says...

Funny how you Canon guys get upset to the point of plonking when
someone disses your precious brand.

That had nothing to do with it.
I nearly plonked you when you made your ridiculous "shadow" comment.

Ridiculous? Not really. Just obvious. Whenever I say something about
Canon, there you are, like the proverbial shadow.

I don't know who you are, Dallas.

I don't know who any of the people on this forum are, but I can
classify them segmentally with the greatest of ease.

You don't have to like Canon. I like Nikon. I like Pentax. I like
lots of brands. The only difference here is that you are clearly
incapable of being even remotely objective about anything any more.
You seem to take some sort of new-found pride in coming up with new
ways of stating your hatred for a *brand.* This is not only
intellectually embarrassing for you, but also indicative of someone
who appears incapable of rational thought on the subject.

I also like Pentax and I also like Olympus. But I will not tolerate
people saying that Canon is superior to anything else because as I
have proved over and over again, that is bull****. There is *nothing*
special about Canon. Sadly this goes against the thought processes of
yourself and a few others around here and you get uptight about it.

I have gone to great lengths to speak with balance regarding various
brands. You, on the other hand, have taken to wearing your lack of
objectivity like a badge of honor. It's not. It merely paints you
as a fool who can't rise above his emotions, and his tiny little
corner of thought.

Unlike you and the rest of the Canon worshipers I have used Nikons and
Canons extensively. In fact I was just working it out that out of the
5 years I have been sick with photograhpy disease, 3 of them were
spent using Canon equipment. So I have effectively had more
experience with Canon than I have with Nikon.

A tiny corner of thought? I don't think so, Mark. A LOT of thought has
gone into the comments I make about how crap the Canon consumer line
is.

I have no doubt that it required significant efforts in thougth on your
part.


I couldn't care if you do, but it certainly won't stop me from
telling it like it is.

BTW, Skip, that 28-135mm lens is only good for amateurs who don't
know any better. Hardly something I would recommend to someone who
is serious about photography.

Please point to images that demonstrate you've somehow moved beyond
the quality of that particular lens, Dallas. I've looked at your
sight, and I can't find a basis for your opinion in this regard.
What can you show in this regard? What have you seen in your lenses
that leads you to declaring crap on anything else.

Mark...you're going to have to do better than that, m'boy. Let us
begin by you telling me what it is about my published images that
leaves you in any mind as to the notion that I don't know what I am
talking about?

Didn't say that.

Are you saying the images are ****?

Why do you keep asking me to tell you your pictures are crap?
Read what I said.
-What is there in your images that leads you to claim obvious optical
superiority? I have never made superiority claims. Never.

If so, tell me
how, because from where I stand every one of them is way, way better
than the snapshots you have posted to Pbase. I say that with
conviction.

Ah. Conviction! -Good word.


I don't claim to be in the same league as someone like Simon Stanmore,
for instance, but I am a lot better than most of the people who have
the cheek to call themselves professional photographers. Of that
there is no doubt in my mind.

I've never slammed your pics. Why do you keep asking me to?

To your likely dismay...I have posted recently how my 24-70 leaves
my old 28-135 behind in terms of sharpness...but I have spoken with
measured, comparative language. You, on the other hand, speak with
foam frothing from your mouth. I've lost all respect for your
opinion because you've chosen a self-declared lack of objectivity.

The 28-135mm Canon lens is a very soft lens compared to most consumer
grade Nikkors I have used with similar focal lengths (I have never
used a 24-120mm though).

But all that is besides the point, because you, like so many other
psuedo photo experts, seem to think that you can tell how good a lens
is simply by looking at a jpeg posted to the internet.

Show me where I've done this. Quote?

FWIW, the
images I have on my site come from a variety of different
sources...digital SLR's (3 types), film SLR's (about 5 types) and
rangefinders (1 type). At least 10 different lenses too. I challenge
you to tell me what equipment took what shot.

That's the point.
If you/I can't tell, then what is it about your shots vs. other's shots that
leads you to declare crap?

And Mark, if dissing Canon is called trolling in your book, what's
Bret guilty of everytime he disses Nikon?

Humor. He's guilty of goading, blatant...humor.
-Something you clearly don't have.

But you just said you don't know me, so how can you make a statement
like that in the same post?

My comments pertain to your posts. I do know your posts...which is what
I've commented on.

We all know Bret's schtick. You don't have a schtick, Dallas. It's
just you.
I remeber WAAAY back when Bret first started posting...I gave him
crap all the time.
-Then after a time it became clear what he was up to, and it turned
into entertainment...not to mention a number of spurts of decent
photography. You, on the other hand, are just turning into an arse.
You aren't funny, Dallas, and you don't show evidence of anything
other than your own bitterness. You merely come off as a guy who
got a black eye from the South African Canon Service Center...and as
a result, has set aside sanity to continue your mindless ravings
against a brand. You have become the poster child for why brand
wars are reserved for fools.

At least I am not a nerd.

There are other states of being which are also worth avoiding.


Regarding "dissing..."
Even I have "dissed" Canon, you boob. Did you read my thread about
whether the 5D was/is over-priced for it's build quality? -About
the lack of this and that? Did you read my loudly expressed
displeasure with Canon's handling of 20D problems way back
when--even though I don't own one? --When Nikon announced specs for
their new generation of topline DSLR a year or so ago...guess who
started a new thread, glowingly expressing how impressed he was??
-That was me, Dallas. -You know...the Canon worshipper (or so you
claim).

So you see, DD...Roxy...Dallas...whoever the heck you are...
You have proven only that when it comes to discussions of equipment,
you are a closed-minded, bitter man...hell-bent on your own version
of reality that leads you to robotic responses of mindless
anti-blatherings.

I never blather. I speak the truth.

LOL!

Some people can't handle the
truth. Are you among them?

Now there's some humor!
Unintentional, of course, but still humorous.


Other than that...You're not a bad guy.


Too late for that.

Aw gee...

"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...
"Skip M" wrote:

"Tony Polson" wrote in message
. ..
John A. Stovall wrote:

Others are already asking that question as to why both Zeiss and Leica
don't do that.


Leica had discussions with both Canon and Nikon within the last two
years.


My credit cards are cringing...


Leica obviously decided not to take this route, so your credit cards
are safe.

For now.

;-)


Hey, two years is but an eyeblink in R&D terms, when it comes to designing a
mount and lens system compatible with a competitors product. It could still
happen...my credit cards aren't relaxing...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

William Graham wrote:

"Skip M" wrote in message
newsor3f.1432$UF4.1026@fed1read02...

"sierra" wrote in message
roups.com...

"Money spinner" - yes "Profit spinner" - no.

Mass market - GM, Ford, VW - losses

Porsche - profits


Porsche was nearly out of business 10 years ago, the Boxter is what saved
them, a (relatively) mass market Porsche.

Chrysler-profits-|
|--DCX-losses.
Mercedes-losses-|

The mass market drives profits in a properly managed company, which, at
this point, GM and Ford are not. Toyota, Honda and Renault/Nissan are
largely mass market manufacturers, and very profitable.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com


Porsche owns over 18% of VW now.....

??? I thought it was the other way round.

"Scott Schuckert" wrote in message
...
Another dentist I know collects 1958 Cadillacs; has over a dozen of
'em. So it's probably no suprise they're camera collectors; the odd
thing was that they all seemed to be into Nikon instead of Leica.

Well, Nikon has marketed a lens and flash that are dedicated to dental
photography......I don't know whether Leica has done this or not.......

"no_name" wrote in message news:_oS3f.5357
Porsche owns over 18% of VW now.....

??? I thought it was the other way round.

I did too, until I googled it and read otherwise.....

Douglas... wrote:
Mark² wrote:

So you see, DD...Roxy...Dallas...whoever the heck you are...
You have proven only that when it comes to discussions of equipment,
you are a closed-minded, bitter man...hell-bent on your own version
of reality that leads you to robotic responses of mindless
anti-blatherings. Other than that...You're not a bad guy.



Feel better now, Mark?

I'm fine.
How are you?

Paul Bielec wrote:
Tony Polson wrote:

"Skip M" wrote:

"William Graham" wrote in message

Porsche owns over 18% of VW now.....


Not exactly. There is a common family ownership of Porsche, Audi
and VW.



William is exactly right. Porsche owns 18.4% of VW and intends to
increase that stake to 19.9%

There is no common family ownership of Porsche, Audi and VW. The
Piech and Porsche families are related, so there is a family
relationship between the respective management teams, but VAG
(VW-Audi) is majority owned by the government of the German states in
which the main VW manufacturing plants are located.

There is a possibility that more VAG shares may be offered on the
German Stock exchange. Porsche relies on VAG for many components and
the Porsche board wished to secure a significant shareholding in VAG
to ensure that the co-operative relationship between the two
companies would not be diluted by any future sell-off.


I went to Wolfsburg few years back and visited the Autostadt, a theme
park next to the main VW factory. It features VW group brands: VW,
Audi, Skoda, Seat, Lamborghini and possibly something else I'm
forgetting.

I thought Chrysler bought Lamborghini... ?

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 22:39:04 -0700, "Richard H." wrote:

DD (Rox) wrote:
Heh, heh. You know who the best retail customers are (or were)?
DENTISTS. When I had my camera stores, the dentists who came in were
incredible hardware junkies. One guy wanted to own - and nearly did -
the entire Nikon catalog. I mean, stupid stuff like Nikon-brand,
darkroom-only bulk film loaders. I know EXACTLY the people you're
talking about!

Funny you should say that, I know two dentists who are hectically
involved in photographic equipment! Actually one's an orthodontist, but
I suppose it's the same sort of thing...

This is an odd trend; I wonder about the cause and effect with dentists
and photography. :-) Locally, there's known to be a large Internet porn
company that's owned by (you guessed it) - two dentists. No knowing if
they shoot their own pics, but I'd bet so.

It's not because they're dentists.
-Rich

DD (Rox) wrote:
Please point to images that demonstrate you've somehow moved beyond
the quality of that particular lens, Dallas. I've looked at your
sight, and I can't find a basis for your opinion in this regard.
What can you show in this regard? What have you seen in your lenses
that leads you to declaring crap on anything else.

Mark...you're going to have to do better than that, m'boy. Let us
begin by you telling me what it is about my published images that
leaves you in any mind as to the notion that I don't know what I am
talking about? Are you saying the images are ****? If so, tell me
how, because from where I stand every one of them is way, way better
than the snapshots you have posted to Pbase.

Actually, I agree with you. Many of the images I have posted there are
indeed nothing more than snapshots. I use Pbase for various reasons...and
not to impress or sell my photos...

Shots like these are certainly snapshots:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/38258545/original
and
http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/47924570/original

Others are posted merely for purposes relating to discussions...
Like:

http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/37018969/original

But oops! There's yet another example of me pointing out Canon flaws!

Once again, I foil your accusations of Canon worship.

Then there are other shots that I think surpass your "snapshot" put-down...
Like this one:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/47982648/original

And this one:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/36235344/original
(you should see that one printed to 48 inches... Looks rather better than
most other shots I've seen of this famous crater--which is as close as
you'll ever hear me come to bragging).

Or perhaps this non snap-shot:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/36235043/original

Here's another one I like, though I'd have to say it's a bit off-level:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/38258451/original

I like this one too...kinda different:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/47616297/original

What are some of the shots you like from your site?
(And please note I've made zero claims about any great this or that...
These are just shots that I think move a bit beyond happy-snaps...

-Mark

"Mark²" mjmorgan(lowest even number wrote in message
news:LKY3f.1758$UF4.49@fed1read02...
Paul Bielec wrote:



I went to Wolfsburg few years back and visited the Autostadt, a theme
park next to the main VW factory. It features VW group brands: VW,
Audi, Skoda, Seat, Lamborghini and possibly something else I'm
forgetting.

I thought Chrysler bought Lamborghini... ?

Wow, you're behind the curve! Chrysler sold Lambo not long after Lee
Iacocca's departure, and severed the connection with DeTomaso and Maserati
about the same time. Some Southeast Asian consortium owned Lambo just long
enough to truly screw up the finances, then VW/Audi bought the mess, put it
under Audi aegis. The Lambo Gallardo shares engineering and an engine with
the upcoming Audi mid engined supercar, the Le Mans.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com