Time to chuck the P&S's into the garbage

On Sat, 2 Apr 2011 16:50:50 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

Check out prices for used DSLRs.

http://www.spammer.com/andersonrm/image/133620667

Doesn't matter how cheap they are. Someone could pay me $1,000 to take one
off of their hands and I still wouldn't want it. Their 1900's clap-trap and
noisy mechanical technology is nothing but a huge drawback to photography
these days.

Why do you think they're so cheap? Nobody wants used ones, and new ones
aren't much of an incentive either.

Better Info wrote:
On Sat, 2 Apr 2011 16:50:50 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

Check out prices for used DSLRs.

http://www.spammer.com/andersonrm/image/133620667

Doesn't matter how cheap they are. Someone could pay me $1,000 to take one
off of their hands and I still wouldn't want it. Their 1900's clap-trap and
noisy mechanical technology is nothing but a huge drawback to photography
these days.

If you buy one you need to know how to repair them. All those springs
and gears tend to gum up and stop working over the decades.

--
Ray Fischer | Mendacracy (n.) government by lying
| The new GOP ideal

On 04/03/2011 03:47 AM, Better Info wrote:

Why do you think they're so cheap? Nobody wants used ones, and new ones
aren't much of an incentive either.

You should check the prices of used superzooms...


--
Bertrand

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 20:39:54 +0200, Ofnuts
wrote:

On 04/03/2011 03:47 AM, Better Info wrote:

Why do you think they're so cheap? Nobody wants used ones, and new ones
aren't much of an incentive either.

You should check the prices of used superzooms...

Don't have to, troll. They were also inexpensive brand new. Though a few
models now sell for more as used than they did as new. I know this because
I've been looking for a few of my favorites as backups every now and then.
Can't find a good deal on them when I've checked, what few are being sold
as used, if you can find one. Everyone's hanging onto them. I totally
understand why.

Like all trolls, you're ignorant and pointless.

On 04/03/2011 10:37 PM, Outing Trolls is FUN! wrote:

Though a few
models now sell for more as used than they did as new.

Now that's an interesting admission:

1) "a few": all others were crap

2) "now sell for more as used than they did as new": since the prices of
new cameras are decreasing, these used cameras are more expensive that
their "equivalent" recent ones, which means they are perceived as far
superior, despite their "short" zoom or low pixel count.

So we agree... the problem with recent compact/bridge/superzoom cameras
is that the pixel-count wars have led manufacturers to add pixels faster
that they can mitigate the problems this creates (noise, etc...) (this
is also true, but to a lesser extent, of DSLRs) and extend zoom range
beyond what they can reasonably do and what is really usable by us mere
mortals.

--
Bertrand

On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 16:26:29 +0200, NumbNuts wrote:

So we agree...

Why would anyone let a troll like you, who clearly puts words in other's
mouths, allow you to think you agree with words they never said?

Is that they only way you can get someone to agree with you in your mind?
By inventing words they never said so you can then imagine that you agree
with them?

There's a word for that in studies of psychology. Several words as a matter
of fact. You might want to look that up. But it would probably be simpler
to have the resident staff and your attendants explain them to you in words
you can understand. That is, if you don't go off again inventing things
they never said just so you can pretend to understand and agree with them.

On 04/04/2011 05:37 PM, Outing Trolls is FUN! wrote:
On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 16:26:29 +0200, wrote:

So we agree...

Why would anyone let a troll like you, who clearly puts words in other's
mouths, allow you to think you agree with words they never said?

So you never said "Though a few models now sell for more as used than
they did as new.".... Sorry, must be another sock puppet then...

--
Bertrand