On 20/10/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
Yesterday I was browsing in our local high street chain, looking for a
digicam for a friend of mine who is here for a year. Our (UK)
equivalent of Joe Six-pack was looking at a 300D. I know one shouldn't
judge by appearances (especially when I consider
Now I feel sooo much better (although, in my case,
definitely the reverse is true)
g
I guess, the ideal ad would show a scantily clad girl
trying an *istD and a scantily clad guy holding a bunch
of FA* lenses (the big ones, to really get the message
across) for her. For the precious moments
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hermann said:
I think the thing that bothers me most about the ad is that there is so
little useful info on the *ist-D, so the main emphasis of the ad is sex.
And, speaking for myself, I'd rather look at a great new camera than a scantily-
clad woman --
- Original Message -
From: Mike Ignatiev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I guess, the ideal ad would show a scantily clad girl
trying an *istD and a scantily clad guy holding a bunch
of FA* lenses (the big ones, to really get the message
across) for her. For the precious moments indeed.
Hmm...
Exactly. It's not really sexist. It's not particularly offensive to
most. It's just lousy advertising. But isn't that what we might expect/
By the way, someone raised an ineresting point earlier. Pentax probably
made it on the cheap. You can bet it's a stock photo that cost them
about $500 at
5 matches
Mail list logo
