Not really. The original photo.net post had a rather specific photographic objective in mind. I don't think the person asking the question had a very good grasp basic photography. (I heard this is a dim lens, does this mean my pictures will come out dark? [confusing viewfinder image with film image]) It also sounded like she was starting from scratch with equipment. There were several posts suggesting that there were better tools for the job than entry level Minoltas of Pentaxes. Pal took this as another photo.net attack on Pentax. The thread veered off into Pentax vs. the world with Pal following up with 4 more responses to press his point. It wound up spilling over here when Pal couldn't get people over there to agree with him that starting with Pentax, for wildlife photography, was just as good as every other system. Of course, everyone over there set out to convince Pal (!) that Nikon and Canon were more suitable for all the standard reasons (stretched out to the point that they had no bearing on the original poster). No one over there suggested that everyone should get a Nikon or Canon, because it would get them NPS or CPS, and everyone will want to rent a 600/4 to shoot their kid playing soccer. BTW, Atkins deleted the thread there. We all know what it mutated into over here.
--- Aaron Reynolds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I totally agree. Wasn't this P�l's point, though? That telling joe > sixpack that he should buy an F55/N55 because he'll get pro support and > can rent a 600mm f4 is kinda silly? Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email! http://mail.yahoo.com/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
