Best Coolpix for HD and low light too?

You basement-life city-boy "males" are so out of touch with reality.
While staying at a hunter's-camp in the Everglades for a whole winter I
met up with a gal from Miami that wanted to come and have a place to
practice firing her .50 caliber handgun. Rounds are pricey so we
recovered as many shells as we could for reloading.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xB7iz1HTh9U

No, I'm not THAT old yet. LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VM1MT...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsSjsBKOiyI

Take a liberal woman shooting, they'll never go back. LOL



--
- Jane Galt

On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 20:56:03 -0500, Jane Galt wrote:

This is what drives women away from
posting in usenet groups.


No, not really. Usenet consists of mostly closeted gay men. I'd put the
percentage above 85% if I had to guess. This is the only way they can get
the attention of other men so consistently and it be "socially acceptable".
Organized sports are another main venue of closeted gay males so they can
play slap-ass in public. How many do you see saying, "Sorry, no time to
reply. My wife's (or girlfriend's) needs are more important than yours."
Give yourself a male sounding name and watch them fawn all over you,
desperately trying to get your attention more so than now.

LOL

"Neil Harrington" wrote :


"Jane Galt" wrote in message
.. .
"Neil Harrington" wrote :


"Jane Galt" wrote in message
. ..
tony cooper wrote :



Ooooh. My kinda woman. (Though I'm mainly a Beretta guy myself.)

As in 9mm? Wuss? LOL

Yep. I've loved the 9mm Luger/Parabellum/NATO/x19 cartridge since long
before it became as commonplace as it is now. It's the perfect pistol
ammo and was probably designed by God. Not too big, not too small, it's
just right -- Goldilocks would have loved it too.

Tried finding any handgun ammo on the shelves at Walmart, since Obama
Nation got into office? It's 18 months later and the shelves are STILL
bare, people are still scared and hoarding.

I was carrying an XD-9 for awhile but the guys in my gun group kept
bugging
me about its lack of "stopping power" ( heck it had 9mm +P JHP! )

Then it was for all practical purposes the equal of any .45 Auto in
stopping power, though of course you will never, never, ever convince
the .45-adoring guys of that.

I know, so I finally went for the Xd-45 ACP. If ya cant beat em, join
em.

COme to think of it, I still have that XD-9 around and need to sell it.
sigh But a woman cant have too many guns. ;-)

They do LOVE their pumpkin rollers! They
think a bullet that big just must be best -- never mind that it comes
out of a basically low-pressure cartridge (the .45 Auto can't handle
more than half the chamber pressure of the 9mm Luger) and has about the
trajectory of a slingshot.

Yeah, but hit a bad guy in the shoulder and the whole arm will be gone.

You should see the hand of the woman who was running the "ladies night" I
used to attend, at the local gun shop here. She accidentally shot herself
through the hand with a 9mm JHP. What a mess. Havent seen her in awhile,
but she said it would take years of rehab to use the hand again.

Read the book "Handgun Stopping Power: The Definitive Study" by Evan
Marshall and Edwin Sanow. They are (or were) two cops who spent years
evaluating actual shootings and comparing the ammunition used in terms
of "one-shot stops" -- actual shootings of people, not just theories
about the subject or blowing holes in ballistic gelatin. Their
conclusion: the best 9mm JHP load did the job better than any .45 or
other cartridge in their accumulated data. Now that was their first book
and they've written a couple of others since, which I haven't read, so
maybe that has changed.

I KNOW. Much of the "9mm doesnt have the stopping power" tales come from
the military, when the idiot politicians make them use FMJ. I know a woman
who had a guy coming at her and fired 7 rounds into him at close range,
before stopping him, because she was dumb enough to use FMJ.

FMJ is for target practice.

Based on the ballistics figures alone, I would expect the 10mm Auto to
be best in stopping power (with the possible exception of some of the
humungous wheelgun cartridges)

Yeah, a .50 Desert Eagle might be amazing.

For home defense, the heck with a pistol, we got the 12 gauge pump, with 8
shells of alternating 00 Buck and slugs.

Glad we got the Limbsaver pad for it though, that thing really kicks my
shoulder.

, but I doubt there's enough data on the
10mm in actual shootings to prove that. Next best would probably be the
shortened version of the 10mm, the now very popular .40 S&W (which some
wags called the ".40 Short & Weak," but they were of course comparing it
to its daddy). That does look like a very effective round to me, better
than either the 9mm or .45, and it's pleasant enough to shoot, but it's
not enough better to make me switch to it. All my reloading gear is in
9mm/.38/.357 and this late in life I'm not going to take on a new size.

I've owned a lot of .45 automatics (all Colts), also one S&W target
revolver in the same caliber, and liked them all a lot. When I was
shooting in competition in the '60s and '70s I had to have a .45 since
one-third of an NRA outdoor tournament requires that caliber (and
actually most competitors use their .45s in the Center Fire third as
well). But I haven't owned a .45 since, and have no interest in owning
another one. I still like the 1911 configuration, just don't care that
much for the cartridge. It DOES make sense for military purposes because
of the Geneva Convention FMJ rule, I'll say that for it. But I'm
satisfied that for civilian purposes the 9mm in JHP loads does at least
as well.

Probably right.


and telling
me to carry a .45 ACP. So I figure if 14 rds of 45 ACP JHP wont do the
job now, I gotta call in Jack Bauer. LOL

Jack Bauer doesn't use a .45 either. At least, not in the shows I've
seen (which were only from the first season). My recollection is that he
was using a SIG-Sauer, so presumably either a 9mm or a .40.

Dont know for sure, but that scene where he tortured the russian snipe was
one of the most gruesome ones I've ever seen on TV.

Still, who would I want defending my country? Or if a nuke was in Denver
and needed to be found? Him or Obama?


"A pistol is just something you use to fight your way back to your
rifle."

LOL

Well, I suppose there is something to that thought.

That's what the military guys have always told me.



--
- Jane Galt

"Neil Harrington" wrote :


I think so, yes. I don't have one yet myself -- being mainly a Nikon
guy -- but the G11 is really getting under my skin and I'm gonna have
to get one soon.

sigh Ok, it's gonna cost us much more than the $450 though. sigh

Why more than the $450?

If I spend no more than $350 we're fine, but if $450, the other half wants
some quid pro quo.


Actually the others you mentioned look good too -- the main annoyance
about most compacts and ultracompacts today is that they have abandoned
optical viewfinders, which is nice in the sense of providing a big LCD
monitor to look at, but can be a real pain in the ass when shooting in
bright sunlight. The optical viewfinders are all horribly inaccurate,
but still better than an LCD in the sun. Still, that can be coped with
in most situations, by shading with a hand or something.

nod





--
- Jane Galt

LOL! wrote :

On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 20:56:03 -0500, Jane Galt wrote:

This is what drives women away from
posting in usenet groups.


No, not really. Usenet consists of mostly closeted gay men. I'd put the
percentage above 85% if I had to guess. This is the only way they can get
the attention of other men so consistently and it be "socially acceptable".

There simply cant be that many closeted gay men.

Like Glenn Beck says, I imagine a lot of them though, are teen guys sitting
in the basements of their mom's house in their underpants.

Organized sports are another main venue of closeted gay males so they can
play slap-ass in public.

LOL!

How many do you see saying, "Sorry, no time to
reply. My wife's (or girlfriend's) needs are more important than yours."
Give yourself a male sounding name and watch them fawn all over you,
desperately trying to get your attention more so than now.

LOL

LOL

Well I'm not here for a date, dont need that. Was looking for a little camera
advice.


--
- Jane Galt

On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 21:22:42 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:

Read the book "Handgun Stopping Power: The Definitive Study" by Evan
Marshall and Edwin Sanow. They are (or were) two cops who spent years
evaluating actual shootings and comparing the ammunition used in terms of
"one-shot stops" -- actual shootings of people, not just theories about the
subject or blowing holes in ballistic gelatin. Their conclusion: the best
9mm JHP load did the job better than any .45 or other cartridge in their
accumulated data. Now that was their first book and they've written a couple
of others since, which I haven't read, so maybe that has changed.

An inexpensive cross-bow has more stopping-power than any handgun. Plus
it's quiet without any illegal silencer. It's the only inexpensive and
readily available weapon that will consistently pierce a flak-jacket. It's
due to the mass of the bolt and the inertia behind it. A little known fact
that the "powers that be" don't want widely known. After recently
purchasing a nice 3-9x 40mm illuminated reticle sight for my rife, I put
the old favorite rifle-site on my cross-bow. Bulls-eyes at 75 yards every
time. Trespassers (civilian or government) should take the "Armed Response"
sign at the end of my driveway seriously. If they don't, their loss.

"Pete" wrote in message
news:2010061914281040873-availableonrequest@aserverinvalid...
On 2010-06-19 10:04:03 +0100, David J Taylor said:

"Jane Galt" wrote in message
. ..
"David J Taylor" wrote :
[]
You do know that "full HD", and your monitor, are only about 2MP, I
presume?

Cheers,
David



Oh my.

Well whatever makes it look so sharp and clear, I want it.

Yes, I sometimes wonder that as well, Jane! One thing is that the pixels
are right on the surface of the display, with no intervening optics, and
there's no "ink spread" which you might get in some printing processes.
Of course, if you want to crop half the linear image you've taken, you
then need four times as many pixels, so having that 8-10-12MP camera does
make some sense....

Oh, and I've seen figures of around 200 pixels per inch for acceptable
photos, and that on a 6 x 4 inch print is 1MP - others say 300 pixels per
inch so that's 2MP.

Yes, good 2 MP cameras produced perfectly acceptable 4x6 inch prints. A

In fact, I have seen perfectly acceptable 8 x 10 prints made from 2MP
images. Compared side by side with a higher resolution same-sized print you
might see a difference, but who does that?

"pixel perfect" 2 MP image produces a large, sharp, and thoroughly
enjoyable image on a good HDTV, sometimes an exquisite image.

Most journals are printed at 200 DPI/PPI therefore a double-page image,
between margins, is about 7 MP. Occasionally, 300 DPI is used for printing
books showing fine art. Some of the top-end printers manage a stunning 400
DPI.

A 300 DPI print viewed from 10 inches by someone with 20/20 vision is at
the limit of visual acuity: this is termed close scrutiny. For 35 mm film
an 8x10 inch print viewed at 10 inches was the accepted reference. It had
lead to false statement such as: a 12 MP Bayer CFA camera cannot produce
prints larger than 8x12 inches. The correct statement is approximately: To
evaluate the quality of an image, print it at 300 DPI on a top end printer
and assess the print from a distance of 10 inches, or the equivalent
thereof to compensate for vision that is not 20/20.

Generally, children are able to focus on objects 5 inches away or less; by
our mid-forties the closest distance for many of us is 20 inches or
further. At 20 inches viewing distance the print must be 16x24 inches for
close scrutiny, which is 150 DPI, etc. etc. Of course, a 48 inch HDTV
viewed from a distance of about 6 feet gives a razor sharp 2 MP image.
Interestingly, it looks a lot more impressive (and bigger?) than a 4x6
inch print viewed from 10 inches.
[ . . . ]

Yes. There I think the difference is mainly psychological. You're not used
to seeing a still photograph that sharp, that large and at that distance. If
you did that all the time and had been doing it for years, I daresay it
wouldn't be so impressive. The fact that it's its own light source (rather
than reflected light, as from a print) probably makes a difference too. I've
seen a similar effect mentioned in connection with projected slides -- they
"look sharper than they really are" compared to an equivalent print.

"Jane Galt" wrote in message
. ..
"Neil Harrington" wrote :


"Jane Galt" wrote in message
. ..
"Neil Harrington" wrote :


Frankly I'd love a $3000 Nikon DSLR but it's like with guns. They say
that the smaller gun you can carry is better than the bigger gun that
you have to wind up leaving at home. Same with this. If it fits my
purse, I have it in a snap. pun If it's baggage, I probably would
leave it at home most of
the time, then I'd miss something like that video of Congressman ( Thug
) Bob Etheridge if I saw something like that going on. :-)

Yes, wasn't that something.

Should give his constituents nightmares, right up until the elections this
fall.

Creeps ME out!

Of course if he'd pulled that on me and not a teen boy....


True. Well now that I have a HD 24" LCD monitor ( Asus VK246H ) and
HDTV at
home, I'm really enjoying true HD, so it would be awesome to be able to
take full HD photos and video and see them on these at home, even as
wallpaper.

I see David has already pointed out that HDTV is only about two
megapixels. And that's at the highest available resolution regardless of
screen size: 1920 x 1080 = 2.07 megapixels.

I guess the awesome factor on an HDTV screen or monitor, must come from
the
sharpness of said lens.

I suspect the "awesome factor" is chiefly psychological. You're not used to
seeing a still photo that sharp, that large and at that distance.

On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 20:08:44 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:


"John McWilliams" wrote in message
...
Neil Harrington wrote:
"John McWilliams" wrote in message
...
Neil Harrington wrote:
"Jane Galt" wrote in message
Exactly. I'd love to have a nice Nikon DSLR, so I could have a
polarizing
lens and all, but it IS for my purse and I already have a bunch of
stuff in
there, including the XD-45 ACP,
Ooooh. My kinda woman. (Though I'm mainly a Beretta guy myself.)
Kinda like Rita, I bet. A lady but not a woman.

Really? What makes you think that?

The same sorta stuff that made me know "Rita", aka "Larry Thong" recently,
was a guy.

Were you the one who was so skeptical about my claim re "Rita" when you
first came to this NG? I never did get an enthusiastic thank you from the
guy whoever he was.

Yes, that was probably me. I was skeptical at first; now I believe you're
right, but I guess I'll never know for sure. But thank you anyway, I guess.
I don't know if that's "enthusiastic" enough . . . :-)

I cannot understand why someone would pretend to be female when he's male,
or vice versa. But I accept that some do, of course.

I can't understand why anyone would care if the poster is male or
female.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

tony cooper wrote :

On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 20:08:44 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:


"John McWilliams" wrote in message
...
Neil Harrington wrote:
"John McWilliams" wrote in message
...
Neil Harrington wrote:
"Jane Galt" wrote in message
Exactly. I'd love to have a nice Nikon DSLR, so I could have a
polarizing
lens and all, but it IS for my purse and I already have a bunch of
stuff in
there, including the XD-45 ACP,
Ooooh. My kinda woman. (Though I'm mainly a Beretta guy myself.)
Kinda like Rita, I bet. A lady but not a woman.

Really? What makes you think that?

The same sorta stuff that made me know "Rita", aka "Larry Thong"
recently, was a guy.

Were you the one who was so skeptical about my claim re "Rita" when
you first came to this NG? I never did get an enthusiastic thank you
from the guy whoever he was.

Yes, that was probably me. I was skeptical at first; now I believe
you're right, but I guess I'll never know for sure. But thank you
anyway, I guess. I don't know if that's "enthusiastic" enough . . . :-)

I cannot understand why someone would pretend to be female when he's
male, or vice versa. But I accept that some do, of course.

I can't understand why anyone would care if the poster is male or
female.



Most people use pseudonyms on usenet anyway, to avoid things like death
threats. Is this a surrise?


--
- Jane Galt