A clique of the shutter?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Marc, Dec 20, 2003.

  1. Marc

    Marc Guest

    Having spent two or three weeks reading this group it's become obvious that
    it has more than its fair share of camera snobs.

    Take the new Sony 828, as an example.

    The 'purists' are busily deriding it - yet the new sample images posted on
    Steve's Digicams look pretty good to me!

    The consensus seems to be that it's not a 'real' camera because it's not
    produced by a 'real' camera manufacturer.

    The Minolta A1, on the other hand, is applauded despite the fact that
    (according to many consumer reviews) it feels cheap, has a nasty grating
    'plastic' action on the zoom barrel, and produces so much noise that Minolta
    ought to offer a free pair of ear defenders with every purchase!...

    Yet......it's from a 'real' camera maker......so that's all right then!....

    Similar comments cold be made about offerings from Canon (20,000 shutter
    operations...Whoopee!) Nikon, Olympus, Pentax........ all of whom have
    their devotees - because they're 'real' photographic companies!

    So, to avoid being ridiculed by the snobs, it's best to buy from one of the
    mainstream manufacturers. But, hang on...... the snobs will still sneer at
    your purchase because it's not a DSLR! - and, if you DO buy a DSLR, they;ll
    still make pitying comments, unless it's a better DSLR than the one they
    happen to own.....

    I was almost dissuaded from buying the F828 - because of the negative
    comments of these self appointed pundits.

    Yet, it seems very well made, is packed with features - and seems to produce
    pictures that 9999 out of 10000 'amateurs' would be happy with.

    What's more, it's available in the UK for less than the price of a Minolta
    A1.

    So, sod the snobs....... especially the one's who post from Japan.....
     
    Marc, Dec 20, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Marc

    Charles Guest

    On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 08:02:37 -0000, "Marc" <>
    wrote:

    >Having spent two or three weeks reading this group it's become obvious that
    >it has more than its fair share of camera snobs.
    >
    >Take the new Sony 828, as an example.
    >
    >The 'purists' are busily deriding it - yet the new sample images posted on
    >Steve's Digicams look pretty good to me!
    >
    >The consensus seems to be that it's not a 'real' camera because it's not
    >produced by a 'real' camera manufacturer.
    >
    > The Minolta A1, on the other hand, is applauded despite the fact that
    >(according to many consumer reviews) it feels cheap, has a nasty grating
    >'plastic' action on the zoom barrel, and produces so much noise that Minolta
    >ought to offer a free pair of ear defenders with every purchase!...
    >
    >Yet......it's from a 'real' camera maker......so that's all right then!....
    >
    >Similar comments cold be made about offerings from Canon (20,000 shutter
    >operations...Whoopee!) Nikon, Olympus, Pentax........ all of whom have
    >their devotees - because they're 'real' photographic companies!
    >
    >So, to avoid being ridiculed by the snobs, it's best to buy from one of the
    >mainstream manufacturers. But, hang on...... the snobs will still sneer at
    >your purchase because it's not a DSLR! - and, if you DO buy a DSLR, they;ll
    >still make pitying comments, unless it's a better DSLR than the one they
    >happen to own.....
    >
    >I was almost dissuaded from buying the F828 - because of the negative
    >comments of these self appointed pundits.
    >
    >Yet, it seems very well made, is packed with features - and seems to produce
    >pictures that 9999 out of 10000 'amateurs' would be happy with.
    >
    >What's more, it's available in the UK for less than the price of a Minolta
    >A1.
    >
    >So, sod the snobs....... especially the one's who post from Japan.....
    >
    >


    coming here is sort of like going to the grocery store.

    Take what is good, don't feel you have to take everything.

    Most people post here for entertainment, very few get paid to be here.
    --

    - Charles
    -
    -does not play well with others
     
    Charles, Dec 20, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Marc

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    Has somebody stepped on the poor little boy's feelings?

    --
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
    home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
    The Improved Links Pages are at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
    A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html
    "Marc" <> wrote in message
    news:tmTEb.6877$...
    > Having spent two or three weeks reading this group it's become obvious

    that
    > it has more than its fair share of camera snobs.
    >
    > Take the new Sony 828, as an example.
    >
    > The 'purists' are busily deriding it - yet the new sample images posted on
    > Steve's Digicams look pretty good to me!
    >
    > The consensus seems to be that it's not a 'real' camera because it's not
    > produced by a 'real' camera manufacturer.
    >
    > The Minolta A1, on the other hand, is applauded despite the fact that
    > (according to many consumer reviews) it feels cheap, has a nasty grating
    > 'plastic' action on the zoom barrel, and produces so much noise that

    Minolta
    > ought to offer a free pair of ear defenders with every purchase!...
    >
    > Yet......it's from a 'real' camera maker......so that's all right

    then!....
    >
    > Similar comments cold be made about offerings from Canon (20,000 shutter
    > operations...Whoopee!) Nikon, Olympus, Pentax........ all of whom have
    > their devotees - because they're 'real' photographic companies!
    >
    > So, to avoid being ridiculed by the snobs, it's best to buy from one of

    the
    > mainstream manufacturers. But, hang on...... the snobs will still sneer

    at
    > your purchase because it's not a DSLR! - and, if you DO buy a DSLR,

    they;ll
    > still make pitying comments, unless it's a better DSLR than the one they
    > happen to own.....
    >
    > I was almost dissuaded from buying the F828 - because of the negative
    > comments of these self appointed pundits.
    >
    > Yet, it seems very well made, is packed with features - and seems to

    produce
    > pictures that 9999 out of 10000 'amateurs' would be happy with.
    >
    > What's more, it's available in the UK for less than the price of a Minolta
    > A1.
    >
    > So, sod the snobs....... especially the one's who post from Japan.....
    >
    >
    >
     
    Tony Spadaro, Dec 20, 2003
    #3
  4. Marc

    Marc Guest

    "Tony Spadaro" <> wrote in message
    news:U1UEb.142750$...

    > Has somebody stepped on the poor little boy's feelings?<



    You do a lot of top-posting, do you?...
     
    Marc, Dec 20, 2003
    #4
  5. Marc

    Mike Guest

    "Charles" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 08:02:37 -0000, "Marc" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> coming here is sort of like going to the grocery store.

    >
    > Take what is good, don't feel you have to take everything.
    >
    > Most people post here for entertainment, very few get paid to be here.


    It would be interesting to how many of this groups posters are paid to do
    the rubbish job. I'm certain the manufacturers lurk here and instruct to
    counter bad publicity. It must be one of the cheapest ways to do it. What
    occurs to me is why hasn't the Sony 828 been fully reveiwed, it was
    announced on the 17th of December. If Sony had production problems it may
    have paid them to tell the public why, instead of leaving it to speculation.
    For example :- We are attempting to meet the challenge set buy Cannon and
    are reviewing our manufacturing options and may out-source some areas of
    manufacture. This will not reduce the quality of the camera etc, etc.
    It unlikely to be a noisy chip as this should have shown its self in the
    mock-up cameras early on. If it is it puts a very big question mark on
    management.

    On the other hand it could be that when Cannon came up with the Rebel/300d
    they had to do some quick thinking to reduce manufacturing costs, who knows.
    For me, it puts a big question mark on the 828. Note how the other cameras
    with similar build profile are being off loaded to clear the decks for the
    next generation of procumers cameras similar to the 828.

    It does not end there Fuji have produced two new cameras which have a fair
    amount of noise compared to the S2 Pro is this fair considering the
    difference in chip size. But you may say aren't these new chips supposed to
    be superior than the last generation? I would say yes but our expectations
    have be raised by the promise of technological progression of doubling
    quality/effectiveness and halving of costs this leads to shorter production
    runs. This in turn will lead to a debilitating manufacturing war. Where the
    consumers will win in the first stages but loss in the end as one
    manufacturer survives.
    Well that's my opinion.
    MikeS
     
    Mike, Dec 20, 2003
    #5
  6. Marc

    Clanger Guest

    I suppose its OK to top post when the topic is known.....saves plodding down
    through

    I still cant understand why people get so pissy about it


    "Marc" <> wrote in message
    news:XnUEb.7026$...
    >
    > "Tony Spadaro" <> wrote in message
    > news:U1UEb.142750$...
    >
    > > Has somebody stepped on the poor little boy's feelings?<

    >
    >
    > You do a lot of top-posting, do you?...
    >
    >
     
    Clanger, Dec 20, 2003
    #6
  7. Marc

    Rob Davison Guest

    Clanger wrote:
    > I suppose its OK to top post when the topic is known.....saves plodding down
    > through
    >
    > I still cant understand why people get so pissy about it


    Courtesy of Hugh Davies (apparently):

    http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
    http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/gey_chr0.htm
    http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/gey_stv0.htm
    http://www.geocities.com/nnqweb/nquote.html
    http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting.html
    http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt
    http://www.malibutelecom.fi/yucca/usenet/brox.html
    http://www.planefacts.ndirect.co.uk/group/advice/
    http://www.star-one.org.uk/computer/format.htm
    http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html
    http://www.usenet.org.uk/usenet-information.html
    http://www.usenet.org.uk/ukpost.html

    (I don't get pissy about it but some of those links make good points
    and snipping and replying in context does seem more natural to me.)

    YMMV but I find that almost all of the worthwhile ones in this and
    every other group I subscribe to snip and interleave their replies.

    > "Marc" <> wrote in message
    > news:XnUEb.7026$...
    >
    >>"Tony Spadaro" <> wrote in message
    >>news:U1UEb.142750$...
    >>
    >>
    >>>Has somebody stepped on the poor little boy's feelings?<

    >>
    >>
    >>You do a lot of top-posting, do you?...


    Re: Original topic. I own a 707 and a 10D. I still use both.

    Both cameras have their uses, their advantages and their disadvantages.
    How these pan out for you depends on your circumstances and needs.
    Nobody elses. Relax willya? :)


    Rob.
     
    Rob Davison, Dec 20, 2003
    #7
  8. I see a number of people who feel that top posting is some sort of sin
    against God. I suggest that you grow up. You are sounding like school boys
    who mock those who are not part of their group.

    There is no recognized authority which has declared top or bottom
    posting as correct. For the most part I will guess most people don't even
    make a conscious decision. They use what their mail reader used by default.

    If there is any "authority" on the subject, it must be Microsoft, as
    they are the biggest in the business, and they have chosen to use top
    posting in their OE product.

    Personally I believe the sender should choose, and they do. I believe
    there are times when top posting is the most efficient and other times it is
    not. I try to use whichever is best for conveying the message. Maybe you
    should try that.

    --
    Joseph E. Meehan

    26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math


    "Marc" <> wrote in message
    news:XnUEb.7026$...
    >
    > "Tony Spadaro" <> wrote in message
    > news:U1UEb.142750$...
    >
    > > Has somebody stepped on the poor little boy's feelings?<

    >
    >
    > You do a lot of top-posting, do you?...
    >
    >
     
    Joseph Meehan, Dec 20, 2003
    #8
  9. Marc

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Tony Spadaro wrote:
    > Has somebody stepped on the poor little boy's feelings?
    >


    Don't know. Look in the miror and see if you are crying.
     
    Ron Hunter, Dec 20, 2003
    #9
  10. Marc

    Marc Guest

    "Joseph Meehan" <> wrote in message
    news:IWVEb.24698$...
    > I see a number of people who feel that top posting is some sort of sin
    > against God. I suggest that you grow up. You are sounding like school

    boys
    > who mock those who are not part of their group.
    >
    > There is no recognized authority which has declared top or bottom
    > posting as correct. For the most part I will guess most people don't even
    > make a conscious decision. They use what their mail reader used by

    default.
    >
    > If there is any "authority" on the subject, it must be Microsoft, as
    > they are the biggest in the business, and they have chosen to use top
    > posting in their OE product.
    >
    > Personally I believe the sender should choose, and they do. I believe
    > there are times when top posting is the most efficient and other times it

    is
    > not. I try to use whichever is best for conveying the message. Maybe you
    > should try that.
    >
    > --
    > Joseph E. Meehan<<




    I suppose that there are those who also think that driving on the 'correct'
    side of the road is also a heinous 'sin' - so that don't do that,
    either....(especially after a few drinks)

    Similarly, there are those who have abandoned paragraphs, spelling and
    punctuation - presumably in the misguided belief that their idiosyncratic
    offerings indicate individuality, rather than illiteracy.

    It's all about a common standard - based upon the most sensible and logical
    way of doing things.

    Even in Ireland, it's rare to see a donkey sitting comfortably in the cart
    while its owner sweats between the shafts...........
     
    Marc, Dec 20, 2003
    #10
  11. Marc

    Mark B. Guest

    Me neither...especially when some of the bottom-posts don't leave any space
    between the text they're replying to and their own text so it's damned
    difficult to tell where one ends and the other begins. Worse still is when
    replies are sprinkled throughout, you can't tell who said what.

    Mark


    "Clanger" <> wrote in message
    news:bs16ot$en7$...
    > I suppose its OK to top post when the topic is known.....saves plodding

    down
    > through
    >
    > I still cant understand why people get so pissy about it
    >
    >
    > "Marc" <> wrote in message
    > news:XnUEb.7026$...
    > >
    > > "Tony Spadaro" <> wrote in message
    > > news:U1UEb.142750$...
    > >
    > > > Has somebody stepped on the poor little boy's feelings?<

    > >
    > >
    > > You do a lot of top-posting, do you?...
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Mark B., Dec 20, 2003
    #11
  12. Marc

    Doc Guest

    "Marc" <> wrote in message
    news:XnUEb.7026$...
    >
    > "Tony Spadaro" <> wrote in message
    > news:U1UEb.142750$...
    >
    > > Has somebody stepped on the poor little boy's feelings?<

    >
    >
    > You do a lot of top-posting, do you?...
    >
    >


    I think it's a secret recognition signal used by homosexuals...

    Doc
     
    Doc, Dec 20, 2003
    #12
  13. Marc

    Mark B. Guest

    "Marc" <> wrote in message
    news:vkWEb.7084$...
    >
    > "Joseph Meehan" <> wrote in message
    > news:IWVEb.24698$...
    > > I see a number of people who feel that top posting is some sort of

    sin
    > > against God. I suggest that you grow up. You are sounding like school

    > boys
    > > who mock those who are not part of their group.
    > >
    > > There is no recognized authority which has declared top or bottom
    > > posting as correct. For the most part I will guess most people don't

    even
    > > make a conscious decision. They use what their mail reader used by

    > default.
    > >
    > > If there is any "authority" on the subject, it must be Microsoft, as
    > > they are the biggest in the business, and they have chosen to use top
    > > posting in their OE product.
    > >
    > > Personally I believe the sender should choose, and they do. I

    believe
    > > there are times when top posting is the most efficient and other times

    it
    > is
    > > not. I try to use whichever is best for conveying the message. Maybe

    you
    > > should try that.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Joseph E. Meehan<<

    >
    >
    >
    > I suppose that there are those who also think that driving on the

    'correct'
    > side of the road is also a heinous 'sin' - so that don't do that,
    > either....(especially after a few drinks)
    >


    You're equating top posting with driving on the wrong side of the road?
    Seriously?

    > Similarly, there are those who have abandoned paragraphs, spelling and
    > punctuation - presumably in the misguided belief that their idiosyncratic
    > offerings indicate individuality, rather than illiteracy.
    >


    Well sure, but try and tell somebody about their bad spelling & grammar on
    the internet and be prepared for a serious flame job.


    > It's all about a common standard - based upon the most sensible and

    logical
    > way of doing things.
    >


    This is usenet...ain't gonna happen. Like I said above, I'd be happy if
    people can put enough blank space between their reply and the text to which
    they're replying.

    Mark
     
    Mark B., Dec 20, 2003
    #13
  14. If the 828 is anything like the 717, it will be a great camera. Sony has
    been one of the pioneers of still digital photography and I still have on of
    their Mavica floppy disk cameras. Their cameras have an undeniable consumer
    appeal which some of the "purists" may resent, but my g/f has taken some
    wonderful shots with her 717.


    "Marc" <> wrote in message
    news:tmTEb.6877$...
    > Having spent two or three weeks reading this group it's become obvious

    that
    > it has more than its fair share of camera snobs.
    >
    > Take the new Sony 828, as an example.
    >
    > The 'purists' are busily deriding it - yet the new sample images posted on
    > Steve's Digicams look pretty good to me!
    >
    > The consensus seems to be that it's not a 'real' camera because it's not
    > produced by a 'real' camera manufacturer.
    >
    > The Minolta A1, on the other hand, is applauded despite the fact that
    > (according to many consumer reviews) it feels cheap, has a nasty grating
    > 'plastic' action on the zoom barrel, and produces so much noise that

    Minolta
    > ought to offer a free pair of ear defenders with every purchase!...
    >
    > Yet......it's from a 'real' camera maker......so that's all right

    then!....
    >
    > Similar comments cold be made about offerings from Canon (20,000 shutter
    > operations...Whoopee!) Nikon, Olympus, Pentax........ all of whom have
    > their devotees - because they're 'real' photographic companies!
    >
    > So, to avoid being ridiculed by the snobs, it's best to buy from one of

    the
    > mainstream manufacturers. But, hang on...... the snobs will still sneer

    at
    > your purchase because it's not a DSLR! - and, if you DO buy a DSLR,

    they;ll
    > still make pitying comments, unless it's a better DSLR than the one they
    > happen to own.....
    >
    > I was almost dissuaded from buying the F828 - because of the negative
    > comments of these self appointed pundits.
    >
    > Yet, it seems very well made, is packed with features - and seems to

    produce
    > pictures that 9999 out of 10000 'amateurs' would be happy with.
    >
    > What's more, it's available in the UK for less than the price of a Minolta
    > A1.
    >
    > So, sod the snobs....... especially the one's who post from Japan.....
    >
    >
    >
     
    gilbert grape, Dec 20, 2003
    #14
  15. Marc

    Drifter Guest

    Oh don't start that waste of time argument again.


    >"Tony Spadaro" <> wrote in message
    >news:U1UEb.142750$...
    >
    >> Has somebody stepped on the poor little boy's feelings?<

    >
    >
    >You do a lot of top-posting, do you?...
    >



    Oh don't start that waste of time argument again.



    There, now everyone can be annoyed

    Drifter
     
    Drifter, Dec 20, 2003
    #15
  16. Marc

    Charlie Self Guest

    Marc responds:

    >"Joseph Meehan" <> wrote in message
    >news:IWVEb.24698$...
    >> I see a number of people who feel that top posting is some sort of sin
    >> against God. I suggest that you grow up. You are sounding like school

    >boys
    >> who mock those who are not part of their group.
    >>
    >> There is no recognized authority which has declared top or bottom
    >> posting as correct. For the most part I will guess most people don't even
    >> make a conscious decision. They use what their mail reader used by

    >default.
    >>
    >> If there is any "authority" on the subject, it must be Microsoft, as
    >> they are the biggest in the business, and they have chosen to use top
    >> posting in their OE product.
    >>
    >> Personally I believe the sender should choose, and they do. I believe
    >> there are times when top posting is the most efficient and other times it

    >is
    >> not. I try to use whichever is best for conveying the message. Maybe you
    >> should try that.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Joseph E. Meehan<<

    >
    >
    >
    >I suppose that there are those who also think that driving on the 'correct'
    >side of the road is also a heinous 'sin' - so that don't do that,
    >either....(especially after a few drinks)


    That isn't even an analogy. Note above, "there is no recognized authority" for
    bottom posting. Note, too, the next time you drive on the wrong side of the
    road, how quickly some "authorized authority" shows up. At least we all hope it
    does, before you do damage. There is no probable damage beyond slight confusion
    with top posting.

    Charlie Self

    "Man is a reasoning rather than a reasonable animal."
    Alexander Hamilton

    http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html
     
    Charlie Self, Dec 20, 2003
    #16
  17. Marc

    Guest

    In message <bs16ot$en7$>,
    "Clanger" <> wrote:

    >I suppose its OK to top post when the topic is known.....saves plodding down
    >through


    >I still cant understand why people get so pissy about it


    Besides the fact that replies coming before statements is illogical,
    most people who top-post leave everything from the previous post in the
    bottom, and each successive post is like duplicating a spring-loaded
    dish rack in a cafeteria, and adding more dishes. I am an
    efficiency-minded person, and the idea of leaving the entire history of
    a thread in each and every post is irresponsible use of server disk
    space.

    Top-posting causes a vicious cycle, because the top-poster doesn't even
    look at what they are quoting; they just push it down the stack, in
    ignorant bliss, but the storage space snowballs, and the logical person
    who scrolls all the way down to see if there are any other comments
    embedded gets carpal tunnel syndrome.

    The most important thing is that each reply should be a direct statement
    to a statement in a previous post, and all extraneous material should be
    stripped out; then of secondary importance is replying in a logical
    manner.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Dec 20, 2003
    #17
  18. Marc

    Guest

    In message <IWVEb.24698$>,
    "Joseph Meehan" <> wrote:

    > If there is any "authority" on the subject, it must be Microsoft, as
    >they are the biggest in the business, and they have chosen to use top
    >posting in their OE product.


    Microsoft is a Johnny-come-lately to usenet, who, along with AOL, have
    destroyed it. The people who wrote OE probably never even heard of
    usenet before being put on the project, as it is about the worst
    newsreader known to man. OE defaults remove all logic and efficiency
    from usenet.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Dec 20, 2003
    #18
  19. Marc

    Guest

    In message <>,
    otforme (Charlie Self) wrote:

    >That isn't even an analogy. Note above, "there is no recognized authority" for
    >bottom posting. Note, too, the next time you drive on the wrong side of the
    >road, how quickly some "authorized authority" shows up. At least we all hope it
    >does, before you do damage. There is no probable damage beyond slight confusion
    >with top posting.


    There *is* damage from top-posting that quotes the entire previous post.
    It wastes space on newsservers, and causes billions of unnecessary bytes
    to pass through the internet each day, robbing efficient communications
    of bandwidth.

    This in itself is not top-posting per se, but most top-posters don't
    trim anything, as the main "motivation" for top-posting is
    non-motivation; laziness.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Dec 20, 2003
    #19
  20. Marc

    Charlie Self Guest

    JPS responds:
    >>That isn't even an analogy. Note above, "there is no recognized authority"

    >for
    >>bottom posting. Note, too, the next time you drive on the wrong side of the
    >>road, how quickly some "authorized authority" shows up. At least we all hope

    >it
    >>does, before you do damage. There is no probable damage beyond slight

    >confusion
    >>with top posting.

    >
    >There *is* damage from top-posting that quotes the entire previous post.
    >It wastes space on newsservers, and causes billions of unnecessary bytes
    >to pass through the internet each day, robbing efficient communications
    >of bandwidth.
    >
    >This in itself is not top-posting per se, but most top-posters don't
    >trim anything, as the main "motivation" for top-posting is
    >non-motivation; laziness.


    I started out top-posting, but I've always trimmed what I felt needed trimming.
    I've seen far more bottom-poster who stick the whole message in unnecessarily
    than I have top-posters doing the same. Laziness has nothing to do with it,
    AFAICT. Stupidity is a more likely culprit, though there are numerous people in
    the world who lack internal editors on their own words, in speech, so it's hard
    to expect them to edit a post to a NG, especially someone else's post.

    Charlie Self

    "Man is a reasoning rather than a reasonable animal."
    Alexander Hamilton

    http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html
     
    Charlie Self, Dec 20, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Howard Wettstein

    Re: shutter delay

    Howard Wettstein, Jul 10, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    811
    Andrew McDonald
    Jul 10, 2003
  2. Berty

    Re: shutter delay

    Berty, Jul 10, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    710
    Berty
    Jul 10, 2003
  3. Olin K. McDaniel

    Re: Shutter delay revisited

    Olin K. McDaniel, Jul 11, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    829
    Roland Karlsson
    Jul 11, 2003
  4. Randall Ainsworth

    Re: Digital camera and Shutter

    Randall Ainsworth, Jul 11, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    3,210
  5. Replies:
    9
    Views:
    947
    Pete D
    Sep 5, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page