The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S

On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 20:12:50 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:
On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 07:32:01 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote
in :

I think that "offense", as well as
"beauty" are in the eye of the beholder!

It's not objectively offensive to insult or demean someone or
something? Really?

Please refer to the answer I gave a few moments ago.

Happy holidays to you too!

--
Best regards,
John
Panasonic DMC-FZ8, DMC-FZ20, and several others

John Navas wrote:
[]
Fair enough, David, the struggle of trying to take you as fair and
objective has also become too much.

Such nice sentiments on Christmas Eve.

Don't worry, John, I will save you the bother. I am putting you in my
killfile, and I would prefer that you sent me no further unsolicited
private e-mail.

As you do sometimes have good points to make, and as I would have liked to
see more photos from your FZ8, a camera similar to one of my favourites, I
do this rather reluctantly, but I cannot justify the time spent pandering
to your every whim and your continual completely unjustified attacks on
me.

I suggest you take note of what your peers here have said.

Happy new year.

David

On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 20:32:21 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:
[]
Fair enough, David, the struggle of trying to take you as fair and
objective has also become too much.

Such nice sentiments on Christmas Eve.

Don't worry, John, I will save you the bother. I am putting you in my
killfile, and I would prefer that you sent me no further unsolicited
private e-mail.

Done.

As you do sometimes have good points to make, and as I would have liked to
see more photos from your FZ8, a camera similar to one of my favourites, I
do this rather reluctantly, but I cannot justify the time spent pandering
to your every whim and your continual completely unjustified attacks on
me.

Likewise.

I suggest you take note of what your peers here have said.

Sadly there are precious few peers here.
I suggest you take note of what I have said.

--
Best regards,
John
Panasonic DMC-FZ8, DMC-FZ20, and several others

In article , John Navas
wrote:

it's interesting that you pick a comparable lens that's very expensive
and few people buy because it suits your agenda, yet you dismiss

Hardly. I picked the closest lens I could find.

so why is it acceptable to pick the closest lens that you can find to
compare to your camera, yet in the other thread where i suggested to
pick the closest windows box to compare to a mac, you said it was an
'artificial configuration' and 'cooking the books' ?

you can't have it both ways.

On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 12:43:46 -0800, John Navas
wrote:

On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 20:32:21 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:
[]
Fair enough, David, the struggle of trying to take you as fair and
objective has also become too much.

Such nice sentiments on Christmas Eve.

Don't worry, John, I will save you the bother. I am putting you in my
killfile, and I would prefer that you sent me no further unsolicited
private e-mail.

Done.

As you do sometimes have good points to make, and as I would have liked to
see more photos from your FZ8, a camera similar to one of my favourites, I
do this rather reluctantly, but I cannot justify the time spent pandering
to your every whim and your continual completely unjustified attacks on
me.

Likewise.

I suggest you take note of what your peers here have said.

Sadly there are precious few peers here.
I suggest you take note of what I have said.

Uhm... you consider yourself peerless?

That may explain a few things.

John, you would truly be more happy in life if you didn't take
yourself so seriously, or play the victim every time someone says
something you don't like about your favorite camera. Or any
inanimate objects that should have absolutely zero role in your
personal sense of worth or self-esteem.

Nobody is attacking you. Period. (At least those of us who have
attempted serious discussion with you.)

You've probably "twit filed" me, but perhaps this sincere advice will
be copied to you by someone else who is concerned about your emotional
well being.

On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 12:18:05 -0800, John Navas
wrote:

On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 20:12:50 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:
On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 07:32:01 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote
in :

I think that "offense", as well as
"beauty" are in the eye of the beholder!

It's not objectively offensive to insult or demean someone or
something? Really?

Please refer to the answer I gave a few moments ago.

Happy holidays to you too!

"Holiday" literally means "Holy Day," so you might as well use the
politically incorrect greeting of "Merry Christmas."

May yours be full of joy and wonder.

On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 15:53:33 -0500, nospam wrote
in :

In article , John Navas
wrote:

it's interesting that you pick a comparable lens that's very expensive
and few people buy because it suits your agenda, yet you dismiss

Hardly. I picked the closest lens I could find.

so why is it acceptable to pick the closest lens that you can find to
compare to your camera, yet in the other thread where i suggested to
pick the closest windows box to compare to a mac, you said it was an
'artificial configuration' and 'cooking the books' ?

you can't have it both ways.

I'm actually having it the same way in both cases -- I pick the lower
cost machine and you do your best to match it.

For a camera to be comparable to the FZ8 it must be configured
accordingly. I freely acknowledge there are dSLR cameras with lenses
that are less expensive and massive, but then they simply can't do the
major things the FZ8 can do.

In the case of notebook computers, the $500 Dell, like the FZ8, is a
fully capable machine that can do pretty much anything. That it doesn't
have the exact specs of the Mac is irrelevant. That you can't configure
a Mac as cheaply, and that even the twice as expensive Mac has a much
smaller screen, is unfortunate for the Mac.

--
Best regards,
John
Panasonic DMC-FZ8, DMC-FZ20, and several others

In article , John Navas
wrote:

it's interesting that you pick a comparable lens that's very expensive
and few people buy because it suits your agenda, yet you dismiss

Hardly. I picked the closest lens I could find.

so why is it acceptable to pick the closest lens that you can find to
compare to your camera, yet in the other thread where i suggested to
pick the closest windows box to compare to a mac, you said it was an
'artificial configuration' and 'cooking the books' ?

you can't have it both ways.

I'm actually having it the same way in both cases -- I pick the lower
cost machine and you do your best to match it.

For a camera to be comparable to the FZ8 it must be configured
accordingly.

for a windows box to be comparable to a mac, it must be configured
accordingly.

I freely acknowledge there are dSLR cameras with lenses
that are less expensive and massive, but then they simply can't do the
major things the FZ8 can do.

In the case of notebook computers, the $500 Dell, like the FZ8, is a
fully capable machine that can do pretty much anything.

if "anything" doesn't include bus-powered firewire hard drives (faster
and more reliable than usb), 802.11n, bluetooth and last longer than a
couple of hours on a single charge. it's also heavier and thicker than
the macbook, which is important to people who carry it around.

That it doesn't
have the exact specs of the Mac is irrelevant.

it's very relevant. you said above:
For a camera to be comparable to the FZ8 it must be configured
accordingly.
so why is it important for a camera to match but not for a computer?

That you can't configure
a Mac as cheaply, and that even the twice as expensive Mac has a much
smaller screen, is unfortunate for the Mac.

the screen is not 'much smaller.' it has the exact same number of
pixels as the dell. apple's sales are also higher than the market
itself for the past several quarters, so it's actually working out
quite well for them.

On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 17:28:51 -0500, nospam wrote
in :

In article , John Navas
wrote:

That you can't configure
a Mac as cheaply, and that even the twice as expensive Mac has a much
smaller screen, is unfortunate for the Mac.

the screen is not 'much smaller.' it has the exact same number of
pixels as the dell.

Do you not know what smaller means?
Nothing whatsoever to do with pixels.
Think inches.
Case closed. Game over.
I'm done.

--
Best regards,
John
Panasonic DMC-FZ8, DMC-FZ20, and several others

David J Taylor wrote:
John Navas wrote:
[]
Fair enough, David, the struggle of trying to take you as fair and
objective has also become too much.

Such nice sentiments on Christmas Eve.

Don't worry, John, I will save you the bother. I am putting you in my
killfile, and I would prefer that you sent me no further unsolicited
private e-mail.

Most people put John in both their Usenet kill-files _and_ their e-mail
kill-files once they're treated to his modus operandi.