Is a 1/1.8" (7.18 x 5.32 mm) sensor sufficient for 10mp and 12mp?

"Paul D. Sullivan" wrote in message
news:WqYzh.2645$5M1.1447@trndny01...
You seem a very arrogant, unpleasant person. Not worth continuing
any conversation with.

It's a perception thing. Those who are able to perceive the
significance of doing it the right way, do. Others don't.

Which created a chronologically interesting message, no doubt quite
contrary to your intentions ...

--
Bart

"Bart van der Wolf" wrote:

To keep flying in the face of that is eccentric, egocentric, or just
plain Dutch (with a wink to Bart).

I agree, and wink appreciated.

That, by the way, is (for me) a new use of 'Dutch' in the English
language. Most uses seem to have a somewhat negative connotation,
often related to (alleged) stinginess (instead of common sense ;-)).
For instance, a Dutch crossing (of a street), is the fastest way of
getting from point A to B. Fastest seems efficient/sensible to me ;-)

The Dutch have also made it to Japanese. If you bowl in Japan, and throw a
game in which you alternate strikes and spares for the whole game, you've
bowled a "Dutchman". (It appears to be "Dutch 200" in English.)

Hey, there's logic he both "going Dutch" and "Dutch 200" involve
alternation of some sort.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 02:01:15 +0100, Bart van der Wolf wrote:

To keep flying in the face of that is eccentric, egocentric, or just
plain Dutch (with a wink to Bart).
. . .

That, by the way, is (for me) a new use of 'Dutch' in the English
language. Most uses seem to have a somewhat negative connotation,
often related to (alleged) stinginess (instead of common sense ;-)).
For instance, a Dutch crossing (of a street), is the fastest way of
getting from point A to B. Fastest seems efficient/sensible to me ;-)

That particular usage is new to me too, although it may be
related, or very similar to another very long standing usage, to be
"in Dutch with", which meant something like "in trouble with". It's
the kind of lingo often spoken in movies made from the 1930's
through at least the 1960's.

ASAAR wrote:
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 02:01:15 +0100, Bart van der Wolf wrote:

To keep flying in the face of that is eccentric, egocentric, or just
plain Dutch (with a wink to Bart).
. . .

That, by the way, is (for me) a new use of 'Dutch' in the English
language. Most uses seem to have a somewhat negative connotation,
often related to (alleged) stinginess (instead of common sense ;-)).
For instance, a Dutch crossing (of a street), is the fastest way of
getting from point A to B. Fastest seems efficient/sensible to me ;-)

That particular usage is new to me too, although it may be
related, or very similar to another very long standing usage, to be
"in Dutch with", which meant something like "in trouble with". It's
the kind of lingo often spoken in movies made from the 1930's
through at least the 1960's.

All interesting! The "being Dutch" comes from my having been raised in
rural Illinois, where there was a fairly large group of farmers whose
families were from Holland. It meant simply, "stubborn". A trait found
readily among us in the NG.

There were also a lot of Scandinavian, - mostly Swedes and Norwegians,
quite a few of German descent, some Scotch-Irish, Scots, Irish and
English. A couple of Italian families, and precious little else.

But how far OT can I get now?

--
John McWilliams

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:06:13 -0800, John McWilliams wrote:

But how far OT can I get now?

Watch out. You (we) are already more than a scone's throw over
the line!

In article , Bart van der Wolf
writes

That, by the way, is (for Hi Bart, there is, of course,
me) a new use of 'Dutch' another possibility: Right
in the English Posting, like this.
language. Most Probably not popular with
uses seem to have a those using proportional
somewhat negative connotation, fonts, who might see it
often related to (alleged) as Double Dutch. ;-)
stinginess (instead of common
sense ;-)). No, that's Scottish. (John,
Scotch is a drink, not a nation.)
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)

Kennedy McEwen wrote:

stinginess (instead of common
sense ;-)). No, that's Scottish. (John,
Scotch is a drink, not a nation.)

In the part you clipped, I referred to Scotch-Irish, Scots, and Irish.
The Queen of England herself referred to the first one herself, over 200
years ago. It's a well known genealogical term, at least stateside, and
it's incorrect to use "Scottish" or "Scots" in its place.

--
John McWilliams

"John McWilliams" wrote in message
. ..
Kennedy McEwen wrote:

stinginess (instead of common
sense ;-)). No, that's Scottish. (John,
Scotch is a drink, not a nation.)

In the part you clipped, I referred to Scotch-Irish, Scots, and Irish. The
Queen of England herself referred to the first one herself, over 200 years
ago. It's a well known genealogical term, at least stateside, and it's
incorrect to use "Scottish" or "Scots" in its place.

--
John McWilliams

Funny, I'd always heard it, "Scots-Irish." But you have the surname to
match, and I'll go with what you said. My family was just a bunch of Border
Reivers...

--
Skip Middleton
www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
www.pbase.com/skipm

In article , John
McWilliams writes
Kennedy McEwen wrote:

stinginess (instead of common
sense ;-)). No, that's Scottish. (John,
Scotch is a drink, not a nation.)

In the part you clipped, I referred to Scotch-Irish, Scots, and Irish.
The Queen of England herself referred to the first one herself, over
200 years ago.

You'll note the irrelevance of Queen of *England*'s description natives
of the other country under discussion.

It's a well known genealogical term, at least stateside,

Well known, but incorrect.

and it's incorrect to use "Scottish" or "Scots" in its place.

On the contrary, "Scots" *is* the correct usage in the specific example
you cited.
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)

Kennedy McEwen wrote:
In article , John
McWilliams writes


In the part you clipped, I referred to Scotch-Irish, Scots, and Irish.
The Queen of England herself referred to the first one herself, over
200 years ago.

You'll note the irrelevance of Queen of *England*'s description natives
of the other country under discussion.

It was a reference to those Scots who had gone to live and work in
Ireland, usually on a plantation, and ended up in England.

It's a well known genealogical term, at least stateside,

Well known, but incorrect.

and it's incorrect to use "Scottish" or "Scots" in its place.

On the contrary, "Scots" *is* the correct usage in the specific example
you cited.

It isn't. So:

Who are you and what are your credentials in this matter? Are you a
rabid Scot? An erudite American? A turncoat?

--
lsmft