JCO, you have argued the same points to death and back - on numerous ocassions. I think we all know wht you feel about this subject. How about GIVING IT A REST?
A. \ On 23/9/04 10:37 pm, "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You must be spoon fed everything like a little baby. > If you are down near the lower limit of the meter cells > and you attempt to take a meter reading with the lens > stopped down at f8 or 11 for example, guess what, NO READING! > Stop down metering reduces the metering range by > the amount you are stopped down, plain and simple but > it went right over your head as usual. > > The two statements of mine below were a direct reply > to the previous posters claims, if you hadn't > deleted his claims you would see they refute > his claims. They are not understandable unless > you know the context. > > JCO > > -----Original Message----- > From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 3:17 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Even more compatibility issues again! (WAS: RE: istDs - > what a great camera!) > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "J. C. O'Connell" > Subject: RE: Even more compatibility issues again! (WAS: RE: istDs - > what a great camera!) > > >> The aperture setting is no more precise with K/M >> lenses on the istD. >> >> The metering is not as precise at small fstops >> and/or low light levels with K/M lenses >> because it is now the old stop down method which lowers sensitivity >> and accuracy. > > I find it amusing that you make these pronouncements like as if you are > some kind of latter day Moses. The big difference is you haven't talked > to God, and you don't have the stone tablets to back up what you are > saying. > > 1) the removal of the aperture simulator is a metering issue, not an > aperture precision issue. > 2) the pronouncment about metering being imprecise flies in the face of > user experience, which shows that it is perfectly precise. > > William Robb > >
