Thank you very much, I'm here all week.
Chris Brogden wrote:
That was funnier than 96% of the posts on this list! :)
Chris
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:38:25 -0500, Peter J. Alling
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Like 47% of all statistics he made them up.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Thanks for posting this. Your figures seem odd. With only 10 replies, how do you arrive at these odd percentage responses?
Shel
[Original Message] From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 11/11/2004 8:58:02 AM Subject: Poll Results(long)
7a- What lenses, Pentax or other, do you find DO NOT work well with your
camera/shooting
style. (sharpness etc)
30% mention the wides are not wide enough now. 10% mention slower than 2.8 is a problem 1% say long primes bring chromayic aberation 1% mention Sigmas 15 f 2.8 1% mention FA 24/2 and FA135/2.8 worked weel on film bodies but not the
digital body.
The rest say all is well with the lenses they own.
8-Has digital taken the place of 35mm film shooting for you
50% yes they shoot no film 49% say they shoot film if hi res is needed or important work 1% said nope.
11-Do you shoot RAW or JPEG or what is needed for the job at hand.
RAW 40% JPG 40% BOTH 19% WHATS NEEDED 1% I noted some shot jpg ONLY if non critical work is being shot, or if they have a LOT of images they want to shoot. One was to cheap to spring for another 1GIG card.<vbg>
-- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
--
I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime.
--P.J. O'Rourke
