«

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/es...ognative.shtml

Try to keep an open mind.

Bill Mcdonald

"Bill Mcdonald" <> wrote in message
news:...
> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/es...ognative.shtml
>
> Try to keep an open mind.
>
> Bill Mcdonald
Bill,
Thanks, definitely food for thought. You know what they say, an open mind
can be filled with rubbish as easily as pucker info. We are all sucked in to
the pixel anorak mind set. Although I haven't a foveon chipped camera or a
high-end Bayer chipped camera yet (still saving the pennies).I find the
insulting arguments of the pixel peepers an embarrassment and one can only
feel sorry for them. I feel they have lost sight of what photography is all
about. This is not unusual, you will find the same type of personality in
hi-fi, computer, angling you name it news magazine/groups.
But apart for the pixel peepers most on this news group are very helpful and
interesting and have helped me improve my photography for which I'm most
grateful.
MikeS

Bill Mcdonald wrote:
>
> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/es...ognative.shtml
>
> Try to keep an open mind.


I think he makes an excellent point!

Lisa

"Lisa Horton" <> wrote in message news:...
>
>
> Bill Mcdonald wrote:
> >
> > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/es...ognative.shtml
> >
> > Try to keep an open mind.
>
>
> I think he makes an excellent point!

Oh brother.

First he reviewed the 828 and found the exact same problems as
every other formal review posted by others, and now he's claiming
people are somehow focusing too much on the problems.

What he calls "cognitive dissonance" is nothing more than a pathetic
attempt at damage control. The jury is in, and the verdict is that
image quality on the 828 sucks. It's the reason Sony made it a
point to not ship production units to reviewers in advance of the
camera's release.

Rick

Personally, I thought he made a great point. That I know of there aren't any
cameras out there that aren't loaded with faults (George may try to convince
you that there is one perfect one out there however). My latest purchase was
a DRebel. It's one of those cameras which could easily drive me to ruin if I
just focused on it's shortcomings, and faults (Actually focusing is at times
one of it's faults). Despite the flaws however, I find it's a tool I enjoy
using, and somehow even manage to get pretty good results with most of the
time.

If the tool fits your needs, and gives you the results your looking for,
dare to enjoy it. In the mean time, I'm still trying to figure out why you
see so many driveways with cars in them. Cars are of such limited utility,
and capability why would anyone ever settle for a car instead of a 4 wheel
drive truck.

For what it's worth

Jeff

Lisa Horton <> wrote:

>Bill Mcdonald wrote:
>>
>> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/es...ognative.shtml
>>
>> Try to keep an open mind.
>
>I think he makes an excellent point!

One of the best things Reichmann's written in a long time. I'm not
surprised it isn't receiving universal praise here in the homeland of
the "pixel peeper". (I can tell even though I've killfiled most of
them.)

Reminds me of something a friend of mine said: "It seems the ones that
shoot the least complain the most."

--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Rick wrote:

> "Lisa Horton" <> wrote in message news:...
>
>>
>>Bill Mcdonald wrote:
>>
>>>http://www.luminous-landscape.com/es...ognative.shtml
>>>
>>>Try to keep an open mind.
>>
>>
>>I think he makes an excellent point!
>
>
> Oh brother.
>
> First he reviewed the 828 and found the exact same problems as
> every other formal review posted by others, and now he's claiming
> people are somehow focusing too much on the problems.
>
> What he calls "cognitive dissonance" is nothing more than a pathetic
> attempt at damage control. The jury is in, and the verdict is that
> image quality on the 828 sucks. It's the reason Sony made it a
> point to not ship production units to reviewers in advance of the
> camera's release.
>
> Rick
>
>

I feel dirty for saying this, but I agree with you about this weird
article. The author berates "pixel peepers", then spins this way and
that to justify a camera whose major flaw is likely due to pixel stuffing.

Corry

--
It Came From C. L. Smith's Unclaimed Mysteries.
http://www.unclaimedmysteries.net

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 02:29:22 GMT, Mark Roberts <>
wrote:


>
>One of the best things Reichmann's written in a long time. I'm not
>surprised it isn't receiving universal praise here in the homeland of
>the "pixel peeper". (I can tell even though I've killfiled most of
>them.)
>
>Reminds me of something a friend of mine said: "It seems the ones that
>shoot the least complain the most."

That is about the best zinger I've ever read on a newsgroup. Your
friend is absolutely 100% correct.

Bill Mcdonald

BRAVO

"Bill Mcdonald" <> wrote in message
news:...
> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/es...ognative.shtml
>
> Try to keep an open mind.
>
> Bill Mcdonald