What game are you reffering to? I was always consistantly arguing for a real thing, K/M AE supported DSLR even as a higher priced model. That's not a game, that's my whole point of commenting in the first place. The game was the other posters who didn't really have a good argument and then starting doing crazy things to try to argue the unarguable. I never did that either. I wasn't sucking anybody into their behavior, it speaks for itself and on their own initiative...That is a fair characterization and I would like to remind all that I repeatedly asked the personal attacks to stop and they continually repeated with no moderator intervention to stop it so don't blame me for that either.... jco
-----Original Message----- From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 6:32 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Camera engineering (was Re: Rename request) On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, William Robb wrote: > The 31 is available, but if you want to hold to an unrealistic notion > of fair > pricing for new equipment, I can't help that. Am I also going to get a lecture on free market and pricing? Tom was talking about equivalence. And equivalence was not defined by Tom. Sure, you can pay 10-15 times as much as the K135/2.5 and get the 80-200/2.8 (if you have the muscle to lift it, but that's not the main point). Or you can get the FA135/2.8 for 3 times as much as the K. But they are not equivalent lenses in my book, other than that there is some FL correspondence. Tom, a reason KEH has as many K/Ms is that they don't sell cheap. Or are you saying that the Limiteds they currently have in stock have not been snapped up because they are undesireable or obsolete or sth? I think some people have been sucked too much into the argument with JCO and have perhaps lowered their arguments. The important thing for JCO to understand is that the game is over. If one feels they are hard done by, they can vote with their feet. Kostas
