Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
On 8/9/14, Brian Walters, discombobulated, unleashed: http://petapixel.com/2014/09/04/why-i-want-to-switch-to-nikon-but-cant- tony-northrup-throws-gas-on-the-canikon-debate/ Are you kidding me? There's 25 mins of that shit?? Holy makerel -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production --www.seeingeye.tv _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
On 8/9/14, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed: You can waste your time debating anything you want. I'm not debating anything, just offering my opinion. Opinions are down the hall, second on the left. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production --www.seeingeye.tv _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
Quoting Steve Cottrell co...@seeingeye.tv: On 8/9/14, Brian Walters, discombobulated, unleashed: http://petapixel.com/2014/09/04/why-i-want-to-switch-to-nikon-but-cant- tony-northrup-throws-gas-on-the-canikon-debate/ Are you kidding me? There's 25 mins of that shit?? Holy makerel Don't blame me - I just passed on the link. ;-) -- Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
I had nothing better to do so I watched it. Not surprising, he is biased, in spite of his statement to the contrary, but so is everybody else. To paraphrase; You need auto focus for portraits. Bland statement, to which I say; No, not really, but Canon does have the least expensive moderately fast 50mm lens. If there's a must have lens in a system, then that's the system you buy. Unless of course you can't afford it. Then you get the closest thing you can afford, and make do. There, I boiled down his entire video into three sentences. On 9/8/2014 1:55 AM, Brian Walters wrote: Quoting P.J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com: Link? http://petapixel.com/2014/09/04/why-i-want-to-switch-to-nikon-but-cant-tony-northrup-throws-gas-on-the-canikon-debate/ Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ On 9/7/2014 11:51 PM, Darren Addy wrote: I will pass along this video, which was featured on PetaPixel. It is by a Canon guy (who I guess is famous but I didn't know of him prior to this) who was so impressed by the new Nikon that he was ready to chuck all his Canon stuff and switch. Except... he couldn't. The reasons why are interesting (and, I think, perhaps relevant to Pentax DSLR users also). Also interesting (if not controversial) is his use of DXO lens data to make resolution comparions across platforms. There is a fair amount to react to here, if the spirit moves you. Watch the video with notepad in hand. :) -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
Thanks Brian and sorry to all. I must have been half-asleep already when I posted that. On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 12:55 AM, Brian Walters apathy...@lyons-ryan.org wrote: Quoting P.J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com: Link? http://petapixel.com/2014/09/04/why-i-want-to-switch-to-nikon-but-cant-tony-northrup-throws-gas-on-the-canikon-debate/ Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ On 9/7/2014 11:51 PM, Darren Addy wrote: I will pass along this video, which was featured on PetaPixel. It is by a Canon guy (who I guess is famous but I didn't know of him prior to this) who was so impressed by the new Nikon that he was ready to chuck all his Canon stuff and switch. Except... he couldn't. The reasons why are interesting (and, I think, perhaps relevant to Pentax DSLR users also). Also interesting (if not controversial) is his use of DXO lens data to make resolution comparions across platforms. There is a fair amount to react to here, if the spirit moves you. Watch the video with notepad in hand. :) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Photographers must learn not to be ashamed to have their photographs look like photographs. ~ Alfred Stieglitz -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 8:53 AM, P.J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: There, I boiled down his entire video into three sentences. This is why P.J. will never be a YouTube star. (Why use one word when thirty will do?) :) I think that a lot of what he is going through is what Pentaxians would/will be going through if/when Pentax ever offers a full frame camera. You don't really realize how much you are taking advantage of (relying on) the 1.5x focal length factor (actually equiv. FOV) of the APS-C until you try to replicate your lenses on a full frame system. To try to find lenses that still give you that focal length and maximum aperture becomes an expensive proposition, when it is possible at all. Extreme example: DA* 200mm f2.8 can be bought for under $1K. (More like $700, used) 300mm equiv. FOV on APS-C Move to a full frame, now you need a 300mm f2.8 to replicate that FOV. Price one of those lately? A Sigma is $3400. A more reasonable choice would be a 300mm f4. You've replicated the FOV, but lost a full stop of light. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
I tried to watch the video but it put me to sleep it's so boring. I can't imagine why anyone would waste their time and energy debating this stuff. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
Well, FWIW, I never heard of him either. On 9/8/2014 1:55 AM, Brian Walters wrote: Quoting P.J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com: Link? http://petapixel.com/2014/09/04/why-i-want-to-switch-to-nikon-but-cant-tony-northrup-throws-gas-on-the-canikon-debate/ Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ On 9/7/2014 11:51 PM, Darren Addy wrote: I will pass along this video, which was featured on PetaPixel. It is by a Canon guy (who I guess is famous but I didn't know of him prior to this) who was so impressed by the new Nikon that he was ready to chuck all his Canon stuff and switch. Except... he couldn't. The reasons why are interesting (and, I think, perhaps relevant to Pentax DSLR users also). Also interesting (if not controversial) is his use of DXO lens data to make resolution comparions across platforms. There is a fair amount to react to here, if the spirit moves you. Watch the video with notepad in hand. :) -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
Cure for insomnia? On 9/8/2014 10:27 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I tried to watch the video but it put me to sleep it's so boring. I can't imagine why anyone would waste their time and energy debating this stuff. Godfrey -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
On 08/09/14 16:27, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I tried to watch the video but it put me to sleep it's so boring. I can't imagine why anyone would waste their time and energy debating this stuff. Is it OK to debate whether we ought to debate it? - Toralf Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
On 08/09/14 16:11, Darren Addy wrote: On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 8:53 AM, P.J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: There, I boiled down his entire video into three sentences. This is why P.J. will never be a YouTube star. (Why use one word when thirty will do?) :) I think that a lot of what he is going through is what Pentaxians would/will be going through if/when Pentax ever offers a full frame camera. You don't really realize how much you are taking advantage of (relying on) the 1.5x focal length factor (actually equiv. FOV) of the APS-C until you try to replicate your lenses on a full frame system. To try to find lenses that still give you that focal length and maximum aperture becomes an expensive proposition, when it is possible at all. Extreme example: DA* 200mm f2.8 can be bought for under $1K. (More like $700, used) 300mm equiv. FOV on APS-C Move to a full frame, now you need a 300mm f2.8 to replicate that FOV. Not really, if the full-frame camera gets an equivalent pixel density to the APS-C one(s). You might then use the 200mm as before, and crop by 1.5x in post processing, and get exactly the same result... - T Price one of those lately? A Sigma is $3400. A more reasonable choice would be a 300mm f4. You've replicated the FOV, but lost a full stop of light. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
On Sep 8, 2014, at 8:56 AM, Toralf Lund tor...@toralf.net wrote: On 08/09/14 16:27, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I tried to watch the video but it put me to sleep it's so boring. I can't imagine why anyone would waste their time and energy debating this stuff. Is it OK to debate whether we ought to debate it? You can waste your time debating anything you want. I'm not debating anything, just offering my opinion. G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote: To try to find lenses that still give you that focal length and maximum aperture becomes an expensive proposition, when it is possible at all. Extreme example: DA* 200mm f2.8 can be bought for under $1K. (More like $700, used) 300mm equiv. FOV on APS-C Move to a full frame, now you need a 300mm f2.8 to replicate that FOV. Price one of those lately? A Sigma is $3400. A more reasonable choice would be a 300mm f4. You've replicated the FOV, but lost a full stop of light. Not really (I mean about losing the stop of light). It's true that f/4 on full frame will only produce an image half as bright on the sensor compared to f/2.8 on APS-C, but that's half as bright in the sense of photons per second _per unit area_. The full frame sensor has a little over twice the area, so it will actually be collecting slightly more photons per second _over the whole image_, which is what actually matters (or, another way to think of it is they will both get the same number of photons per second per pixel if the two sensors have the same number of pixels).And a 300 f/4 on full frame would have about the depth of field as the 200 f/2.8 on APS-C. So these two scenarios are actually very comparable. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
The other side of the coin is that, to produce the same picture (same depth of field and shutter speed), the full frame camera will only be getting half as many photons per unit area, so has to shoot at 2x the ISO of the crop camera. So the common wisdom that you get a stop extra ISO out of a full frame camera is true but misleading, because you _need_ a stop higher ISO on full frame to produce the same image as you would with an APS-C camera. On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Bryan Jacoby bryan.jac...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote: To try to find lenses that still give you that focal length and maximum aperture becomes an expensive proposition, when it is possible at all. Extreme example: DA* 200mm f2.8 can be bought for under $1K. (More like $700, used) 300mm equiv. FOV on APS-C Move to a full frame, now you need a 300mm f2.8 to replicate that FOV. Price one of those lately? A Sigma is $3400. A more reasonable choice would be a 300mm f4. You've replicated the FOV, but lost a full stop of light. Not really (I mean about losing the stop of light). It's true that f/4 on full frame will only produce an image half as bright on the sensor compared to f/2.8 on APS-C, but that's half as bright in the sense of photons per second _per unit area_. The full frame sensor has a little over twice the area, so it will actually be collecting slightly more photons per second _over the whole image_, which is what actually matters (or, another way to think of it is they will both get the same number of photons per second per pixel if the two sensors have the same number of pixels).And a 300 f/4 on full frame would have about the depth of field as the 200 f/2.8 on APS-C. So these two scenarios are actually very comparable. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
bangs head repeatedly against keyboard On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Bryan Jacoby bryan.jac...@gmail.com wrote: The other side of the coin is that, to produce the same picture (same depth of field and shutter speed), the full frame camera will only be getting half as many photons per unit area, so has to shoot at 2x the ISO of the crop camera. So the common wisdom that you get a stop extra ISO out of a full frame camera is true but misleading, because you _need_ a stop higher ISO on full frame to produce the same image as you would with an APS-C camera. On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Bryan Jacoby bryan.jac...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote: To try to find lenses that still give you that focal length and maximum aperture becomes an expensive proposition, when it is possible at all. Extreme example: DA* 200mm f2.8 can be bought for under $1K. (More like $700, used) 300mm equiv. FOV on APS-C Move to a full frame, now you need a 300mm f2.8 to replicate that FOV. Price one of those lately? A Sigma is $3400. A more reasonable choice would be a 300mm f4. You've replicated the FOV, but lost a full stop of light. Not really (I mean about losing the stop of light). It's true that f/4 on full frame will only produce an image half as bright on the sensor compared to f/2.8 on APS-C, but that's half as bright in the sense of photons per second _per unit area_. The full frame sensor has a little over twice the area, so it will actually be collecting slightly more photons per second _over the whole image_, which is what actually matters (or, another way to think of it is they will both get the same number of photons per second per pixel if the two sensors have the same number of pixels).And a 300 f/4 on full frame would have about the depth of field as the 200 f/2.8 on APS-C. So these two scenarios are actually very comparable. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Photographers must learn not to be ashamed to have their photographs look like photographs. ~ Alfred Stieglitz -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote: bangs head repeatedly against keyboard why? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
Is it OK to debate whether we ought to debate it? Thats debatable. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Toralf Lund tor...@toralf.net Subject: Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight... On 08/09/14 16:27, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I tried to watch the video but it put me to sleep it's so boring. I can't imagine why anyone would waste their time and energy debating this stuff. Is it OK to debate whether we ought to debate it? - Toralf Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
Y'all can go all sci-ency and prove either side of the argument. It still boils down to Do you need it? Or do you just WANT it? There's a difference. I want it! On 9/8/2014 12:33 PM, Bryan Jacoby wrote: The other side of the coin is that, to produce the same picture (same depth of field and shutter speed), the full frame camera will only be getting half as many photons per unit area, so has to shoot at 2x the ISO of the crop camera. So the common wisdom that you get a stop extra ISO out of a full frame camera is true but misleading, because you _need_ a stop higher ISO on full frame to produce the same image as you would with an APS-C camera. On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Bryan Jacoby bryan.jac...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote: To try to find lenses that still give you that focal length and maximum aperture becomes an expensive proposition, when it is possible at all. Extreme example: DA* 200mm f2.8 can be bought for under $1K. (More like $700, used) 300mm equiv. FOV on APS-C Move to a full frame, now you need a 300mm f2.8 to replicate that FOV. Price one of those lately? A Sigma is $3400. A more reasonable choice would be a 300mm f4. You've replicated the FOV, but lost a full stop of light. Not really (I mean about losing the stop of light). It's true that f/4 on full frame will only produce an image half as bright on the sensor compared to f/2.8 on APS-C, but that's half as bright in the sense of photons per second _per unit area_. The full frame sensor has a little over twice the area, so it will actually be collecting slightly more photons per second _over the whole image_, which is what actually matters (or, another way to think of it is they will both get the same number of photons per second per pixel if the two sensors have the same number of pixels).And a 300 f/4 on full frame would have about the depth of field as the 200 f/2.8 on APS-C. So these two scenarios are actually very comparable. -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
On 08/09/14 18:03, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Sep 8, 2014, at 8:56 AM, Toralf Lund tor...@toralf.net wrote: On 08/09/14 16:27, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I tried to watch the video but it put me to sleep it's so boring. I can't imagine why anyone would waste their time and energy debating this stuff. Is it OK to debate whether we ought to debate it? You can waste your time debating anything you want. I'm not debating anything, just offering my opinion. I didn't necessarily say you did, I was just wondering if this was the right room for an argument... - T G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
On 08/09/14 20:04, Ken Waller wrote: Is it OK to debate whether we ought to debate it? Thats debatable. :-) - Toralf Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Toralf Lund tor...@toralf.net Subject: Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight... On 08/09/14 16:27, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I tried to watch the video but it put me to sleep it's so boring. I can't imagine why anyone would waste their time and energy debating this stuff. Is it OK to debate whether we ought to debate it? - Toralf Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
I didn't necessarily say you did, I was just wondering if this was the right room for an argument... The argument room is down the hall on the left. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Toralf Lund tor...@toralf.net Subject: Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight... On 08/09/14 18:03, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Sep 8, 2014, at 8:56 AM, Toralf Lund tor...@toralf.net wrote: On 08/09/14 16:27, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I tried to watch the video but it put me to sleep it's so boring. I can't imagine why anyone would waste their time and energy debating this stuff. Is it OK to debate whether we ought to debate it? You can waste your time debating anything you want. I'm not debating anything, just offering my opinion. I didn't necessarily say you did, I was just wondering if this was the right room for an argument... - T G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
Quoting Ken Waller kwal...@peoplepc.com: I didn't necessarily say you did, I was just wondering if this was the right room for an argument... The argument room is down the hall on the left. No it isn't... (someone was bound to say that - it might as well be me!) Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Toralf Lund tor...@toralf.net Subject: Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight... On 08/09/14 18:03, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Sep 8, 2014, at 8:56 AM, Toralf Lund tor...@toralf.net wrote: On 08/09/14 16:27, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I tried to watch the video but it put me to sleep it's so boring. I can't imagine why anyone would waste their time and energy debating this stuff. Is it OK to debate whether we ought to debate it? You can waste your time debating anything you want. I'm not debating anything, just offering my opinion. I didn't necessarily say you did, I was just wondering if this was the right room for an argument... - T G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
No it isn't... That'll be $1.50 per minute. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Brian Walters apathy...@lyons-ryan.org Subject: Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight... Quoting Ken Waller kwal...@peoplepc.com: I didn't necessarily say you did, I was just wondering if this was the right room for an argument... The argument room is down the hall on the left. No it isn't... (someone was bound to say that - it might as well be me!) Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Toralf Lund tor...@toralf.net Subject: Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight... On 08/09/14 18:03, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Sep 8, 2014, at 8:56 AM, Toralf Lund tor...@toralf.net wrote: On 08/09/14 16:27, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I tried to watch the video but it put me to sleep it's so boring. I can't imagine why anyone would waste their time and energy debating this stuff. Is it OK to debate whether we ought to debate it? You can waste your time debating anything you want. I'm not debating anything, just offering my opinion. I didn't necessarily say you did, I was just wondering if this was the right room for an argument... - T G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
I will pass along this video, which was featured on PetaPixel. It is by a Canon guy (who I guess is famous but I didn't know of him prior to this) who was so impressed by the new Nikon that he was ready to chuck all his Canon stuff and switch. Except... he couldn't. The reasons why are interesting (and, I think, perhaps relevant to Pentax DSLR users also). Also interesting (if not controversial) is his use of DXO lens data to make resolution comparions across platforms. There is a fair amount to react to here, if the spirit moves you. Watch the video with notepad in hand. :) -- Photographers must learn not to be ashamed to have their photographs look like photographs. ~ Alfred Stieglitz -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT? In case you are having some insomnia tonight...
Link? On 9/7/2014 11:51 PM, Darren Addy wrote: I will pass along this video, which was featured on PetaPixel. It is by a Canon guy (who I guess is famous but I didn't know of him prior to this) who was so impressed by the new Nikon that he was ready to chuck all his Canon stuff and switch. Except... he couldn't. The reasons why are interesting (and, I think, perhaps relevant to Pentax DSLR users also). Also interesting (if not controversial) is his use of DXO lens data to make resolution comparions across platforms. There is a fair amount to react to here, if the spirit moves you. Watch the video with notepad in hand. :) -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
