On 1/30/2011 5:52 PM, Steven Desjardins wrote:
Actually, I think this has been in general rather even-tempered discussion. ;-) You, Boris, are always courteous.
Thank you, Steve. So far I haven't been able bump into the reason not to be courteous, as you put it.
I don't think I'm switching positions. The argument is based on a comparison of two situations. These two situations are a single photographer of varying skills with each of two sets of equipment, one set being noticeably higher quality than the other.. I am trying to show that quality of equipment does matter in most situations. This means that the same photographer will, on the average, do better with the higher quality equipment. The language issue may be that the comparison does not imply absolute quality. An absolute duffer may not be helped by anything. A novice with some natural ability may do better with a camera with better exposure and AF. (I suspect that the better the photographer the more difference the equipment will make (at least up to a certain point), but this is ancillary to my main point.) In other words, I'm not saying that good equipment will produce good work, I'm simply saying it will produce better work on the average.
Well, your reasoning appears sound do me. One can say that a car with 5 gear DSG gearbox will yield better MPG figures than that with older 4 gear gearbox provided the (inexperienced) driver is driving not like a lunatic.
My point has been somewhat different, although it seems to go in line with what you said. So, we basically agree, but we don't agree to exact terms and terminology of our agreement.
Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
