E.R.N. Reed wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 1/30/2006 9:10:05 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm not opposed to there being a 3rd section of the gallery each
month - Non-Pentax gear.
Tom C.
========
Hmmm. Not a bad idea. We could even label that section Darkside
Defectors.
Hehehehe.
Although I am not sure if that covers Leica.
I am also fine keeping it the way it is. But I must I am say I am
intrigued by an open, open section.
Look at it this way, it would just go to show that Pentax gear is
better, when one compares the shots side by side.
Marnie aka Doe ;-)
I think it's more likely to show that the equipment doesn't matter;
the photographer does. Some of the better PUGgers have a dark side or
two, and depending what they show at the time, that might give the
wrong impression of which gear is better. (Frank, for instance, has a
Leica he's not afraid to use; César and Godfrey are apparently quite
ecumenical in their equipment choices, etc.)
I don't feel *very* strongly about this, but since Darkside Defectors
can, and do, post PESOs, I'm content to keep the PUG for Pentax gear.
(Of which, as you reassured me, you also own some ... )
ERN
Eleanor,
I have to agree with you about the photographer being the difference.
And I also agree about keeping the PUG for Pentax gear.
As a note, I took a shot of some equipment at work for a presentation.
I had a new co-worker ask if I had taken the shot. I cannot recall if I
used the *ist D, Nikon D1X, or the squadron's p&s for that shot. But he
was in awe of it. It was my knowing the equipment and its limitations
and my vision that delivered that shot.
I must admit that you stopped me by using the word ecumenical. I
figured it could not be that bad if I were being grouped with Godfrey :-P
Should I mention that I may be looking for a Leica on my next trip north?
Never straying far from Pentax,
César
Panama City, Florida
