Harman Bajwa wrote: > > Peter, > > No disrespect to you, but the obvious in your > arguments was that you had a good sample and that > IMHO would not neccessarily constitute enough proof to > be considered as good advice. The apples "analogy" was > brought up by you only and I was just trying to show > that is very easy to simplify and generalize, and > ignore other things just because they may not be > apparent in your case. > > If you feel my comments are out of line please > consider that I am only trying to illustrate by > "extending" your own analogy. If my example is > incorrect and does not stand water then even your > analogy, by extension, does not. I am sorry to say but > I disagree with you, respectfully. ------------------------------------------------- Harman,
Thanks Harman. Glad to see there are some people with manners on the list. You make some excellent points. Perhaps I was lucky in getting good Sigma lenses. All I can say is I am happy with them. Peter K * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
