HOYA SWALLOWS PENTAX !

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RiceHigh, Dec 21, 2006.

  1. RiceHigh

    RiceHigh Guest

    1. Advertising

  2. RiceHigh

    Phil Wheeler Guest

    Phil Wheeler, Dec 21, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. RiceHigh

    acl Guest

    Re: End of an Era

    jeremy wrote:
    > mechanical build quality had deteriorated noticably. Just like new cars.
    > Better fuel economy and more amenities, at the expense of less sheet metal
    > and smaller overall size.


    So, basically, you prefer cars with lots of sheet metal and large size?
     
    acl, Dec 21, 2006
    #3
  4. RiceHigh

    jeremy Guest

    End of an Era

    Well, many of us sensed that it was coming.

    Pentax had been a longtime user of Hoya optical glass, but to see Hoya
    swallow Pentax us is disconcerting.

    These mergers nearly always result in big changes, and I would not be
    surprised if the "Pentax" name disappears entirely over the next few years.

    Pentax, for me, was never really the same after they changed their name from
    Asahi Optical Co. to Pentax Corp. They came out with uninspiring cameras
    that came and went without making their marks, unlike the Spotmatic series
    did.

    They cheapened their lenses once they introduced the "A" series. THis was
    particularly disconcerting because the optical performance of the "A" lenses
    was superior to that of the screwmounts and the original K-mounts, while the
    mechanical build quality had deteriorated noticably. Just like new cars.
    Better fuel economy and more amenities, at the expense of less sheet metal
    and smaller overall size.

    When I heard that Pentax had just invested in a lot of factory space in
    VIETNAM I knew that they had given up on their legacy.

    I'm depressed. THat's progress, I suppose.
     
    jeremy, Dec 21, 2006
    #4
  5. RiceHigh

    Ken Lucke Guest

    Re: End of an Era

    In article <>, acl
    <> wrote:

    > jeremy wrote:
    > > mechanical build quality had deteriorated noticably. Just like new cars.
    > > Better fuel economy and more amenities, at the expense of less sheet metal
    > > and smaller overall size.

    >
    > So, basically, you prefer cars with lots of sheet metal and large size?



    Damn straight _I_ do. Sheet metal, true internal structure (not just
    some flimsy suppoorts for the outer skin), and large size. I'd take
    high strength composite fiber/plastics (NOT fiberglass!) if they ever
    start making cars with them (oops, sorry, that was an inadvertent cue
    for RichA to enter the thread with his obsession), but until then, I
    want METAL around me. The more the better.

    Ever seen a serious wreck? Ever been in one?

    From 1979 to 1996, I worked as a professional, full time paramedic (in
    Portland, OR and other places), and the last 6 years was also a
    firefighter. I've _seen_ (and sometimes had to scrape up) the
    difference in outcomes.

    Sorry, but to hell with fuel economy... with the millions of people on
    the road in this country who merely know "how to operate a motor
    vehicle" as opposed to actually knowing how to _drive_ their vehicles
    (and there is a HUGE difference between those two skillsets), I want a
    tank around me, if possible. Again, damn straight I prefer a vehicle
    with some substance to it rather than today's tin cans that a wrinkle
    in the sheet metal causes major loss of body integrity and strength
    (literally).

    --
    You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a
    reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating
    the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for
    independence.
    -- Charles A. Beard
     
    Ken Lucke, Dec 21, 2006
    #5
  6. RiceHigh

    RichA Guest

    Re: End of an Era

    Ken Lucke wrote:
    > In article <>, acl
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > > jeremy wrote:
    > > > mechanical build quality had deteriorated noticably. Just like new cars.
    > > > Better fuel economy and more amenities, at the expense of less sheet metal
    > > > and smaller overall size.

    > >
    > > So, basically, you prefer cars with lots of sheet metal and large size?

    >
    >
    > Damn straight _I_ do. Sheet metal, true internal structure (not just
    > some flimsy suppoorts for the outer skin), and large size. I'd take
    > high strength composite fiber/plastics (NOT fiberglass!) if they ever
    > start making cars with them (oops, sorry, that was an inadvertent cue
    > for RichA to enter the thread with his obsession), but until then, I
    > want METAL around me. The more the better.
    >
    > Ever seen a serious wreck? Ever been in one?
    >
    > From 1979 to 1996, I worked as a professional, full time paramedic (in
    > Portland, OR and other places), and the last 6 years was also a
    > firefighter. I've _seen_ (and sometimes had to scrape up) the
    > difference in outcomes.
    >
    > Sorry, but to hell with fuel economy... with the millions of people on
    > the road in this country who merely know "how to operate a motor
    > vehicle" as opposed to actually knowing how to _drive_ their vehicles
    > (and there is a HUGE difference between those two skillsets), I want a
    > tank around me, if possible. Again, damn straight I prefer a vehicle
    > with some substance to it rather than today's tin cans that a wrinkle
    > in the sheet metal causes major loss of body integrity and strength
    > (literally).
    >
    > --
    > You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a
    > reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating
    > the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for
    > independence.
    > -- Charles A. Beard


    Recent study on the news the other night. You are twice as likely to
    die in an accident
    with a small car than a large one, internal compensation devices
    (airbags) nothwithstanding.
     
    RichA, Dec 21, 2006
    #6
  7. RiceHigh

    acl Guest

    Re: End of an Era

    Ken Lucke wrote:
    > In article <>, acl
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > > jeremy wrote:
    > > > mechanical build quality had deteriorated noticably. Just like new cars.
    > > > Better fuel economy and more amenities, at the expense of less sheet metal
    > > > and smaller overall size.

    > >
    > > So, basically, you prefer cars with lots of sheet metal and large size?

    >
    >
    > Damn straight _I_ do. Sheet metal, true internal structure (not just
    > some flimsy suppoorts for the outer skin), and large size. I'd take
    > high strength composite fiber/plastics (NOT fiberglass!) if they ever
    > start making cars with them (oops, sorry, that was an inadvertent cue
    > for RichA to enter the thread with his obsession), but until then, I
    > want METAL around me. The more the better.
    >
    > Ever seen a serious wreck? Ever been in one?


    Yes, I've been in one from which I was lucky to get out alive. Can't
    say it changed my view (if anything, it enhanced my opinion that how a
    car handles is more important than how robust it is). I agree that if a
    tank hits me then it's better to be in another tank, though.


    > From 1979 to 1996, I worked as a professional, full time paramedic (in
    > Portland, OR and other places), and the last 6 years was also a
    > firefighter. I've _seen_ (and sometimes had to scrape up) the
    > difference in outcomes.
    >
    > Sorry, but to hell with fuel economy... with the millions of people on
    > the road in this country who merely know "how to operate a motor
    > vehicle" as opposed to actually knowing how to _drive_ their vehicles
    > (and there is a HUGE difference between those two skillsets), I want a
    > tank around me, if possible. Again, damn straight I prefer a vehicle
    > with some substance to it rather than today's tin cans that a wrinkle
    > in the sheet metal causes major loss of body integrity and strength
    > (literally).
    >


    Well, we have very different priorities in cars, I must admit.
     
    acl, Dec 21, 2006
    #7
  8. RiceHigh

    Pudentame Guest

    Re: End of an Era

    jeremy wrote:
    > Well, many of us sensed that it was coming.
    >
    > Pentax had been a longtime user of Hoya optical glass, but to see Hoya
    > swallow Pentax us is disconcerting.
    >
    > These mergers nearly always result in big changes, and I would not be
    > surprised if the "Pentax" name disappears entirely over the next few years.
    >


    Actually, the "Pentax" name is one of the more valuable things Hoya's
    getting from the deal. I expect they'll be keeping it at least in the
    photography business.

    The driving factor behind the merger appears to be Pentax and Hoya
    combining their efforts in the medical imaging field.
     
    Pudentame, Dec 21, 2006
    #8
  9. RiceHigh

    Pudentame Guest

    Re: End of an Era

    RichA wrote:
    >
    > Recent study on the news the other night. You are twice as likely to
    > die in an accident
    > with a small car than a large one, internal compensation devices
    > (airbags) nothwithstanding.
    >


    OTOH, my own experience indicates a smaller, more nimble vehicle allows
    the driver avoid accidents he might not be able to avoid in a larger,
    heavier, less maneuverable automobile.
     
    Pudentame, Dec 21, 2006
    #9
  10. Re: End of an Era

    jeremy wrote:
    > Well, many of us sensed that it was coming.
    >
    > Pentax had been a longtime user of Hoya optical glass, but to see Hoya
    > swallow Pentax us is disconcerting.
    >


    They had already swallowed a big chunk of Pentax, as their subsidiary
    brand Tokina makes most of the popular lenses (not the special stuff)

    David
     
    David Kilpatrick, Dec 21, 2006
    #10
  11. RiceHigh

    jeremy Guest

    Re: End of an Era

    "Pudentame" <> wrote in message
    news:458ae4b4$0$27111$...
    > jeremy wrote:
    >> Well, many of us sensed that it was coming.
    >>
    >> Pentax had been a longtime user of Hoya optical glass, but to see Hoya
    >> swallow Pentax us is disconcerting.
    >>
    >> These mergers nearly always result in big changes, and I would not be
    >> surprised if the "Pentax" name disappears entirely over the next few
    >> years.
    >>

    >
    > Actually, the "Pentax" name is one of the more valuable things Hoya's
    > getting from the deal. I expect they'll be keeping it at least in the
    > photography business.
    >
    > The driving factor behind the merger appears to be Pentax and Hoya
    > combining their efforts in the medical imaging field.
    >


    No, the driving factor is that Pentax has lagged behind Canon and Nikon in
    the digital camera business, and is now having to deal with competition from
    companies that previously had not entered the camera business, like Sony,
    Panasonic, Casio and HP. Pentax screwed up, big-time, and they are no
    longer viable.

    Hoya will get no more mileage out of the Pentax brand name than Konica got
    out of their use of the Minolta name. People are getting wise to the fact
    that the mere presence of a well-known brand name does not guarantee that
    the former quality levels are going to be maintained.

    I'm upset over the loss of Pentax, but I really have only myself to blame.
    Pentax began going down the slippery slope shortly after they abandoned the
    screw mount. Their cameras and lenses slowly began to be cheapened, and
    build quality became noticeably inferior to previous products. Nikon and
    Canon did the same thing, but they maintained parallel lines of
    "professional" gear, priced high, but still available to those that wanted
    it. What did Pentax do? They exited the professional camera market when
    they withdrew the LX from production, and they produced only 3 FA Limited
    lenses for film cameras, and even those had non-standard focal lengths.

    I read recently that Pentax committed to expanding their factories in
    VIETNAM, apparently as a means of keeping their costs down because of
    cheaper labor. Sorry, but this boy ain't buying a Vietnamese camera--not
    from Pentax and not from anybody else, either. And I think that a lot of us
    feel the same way.

    I don't anticipate crowds lining up to buy the "Hoya-Pentax" brand of
    cameras and lenses ("SMC Hoya-Pentax?")

    It just may be the right time for me to embrace plastic bodies and buy some
    Nikon or Canon digital gear. I'm just in the dumps over hearing that news
    of Pentax's upcoming demise. We're going to become orphans.
     
    jeremy, Dec 21, 2006
    #11
  12. RiceHigh

    jeremy Guest

    Re: End of an Era

    "David Kilpatrick" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > jeremy wrote:
    >> Well, many of us sensed that it was coming.
    >>
    >> Pentax had been a longtime user of Hoya optical glass, but to see Hoya
    >> swallow Pentax us is disconcerting.
    >>

    >
    > They had already swallowed a big chunk of Pentax, as their subsidiary
    > brand Tokina makes most of the popular lenses (not the special stuff)
    >
    > David


    I was hoping that Pentax might release a full crop digital body that would
    take their older 35mm lenses, but that appears to be a pipe dream now. Time
    to start looking for a new camera brand.
     
    jeremy, Dec 21, 2006
    #12
  13. Re: End of an Era

    acl wrote:

    > Ken Lucke wrote:
    >
    >>In article <>, acl
    >><> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>jeremy wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>mechanical build quality had deteriorated noticably. Just like new cars.
    >>>>Better fuel economy and more amenities, at the expense of less sheet metal
    >>>>and smaller overall size.
    >>>
    >>>So, basically, you prefer cars with lots of sheet metal and large size?

    >>
    >>Damn straight _I_ do. Sheet metal, true internal structure (not just
    >>some flimsy suppoorts for the outer skin), and large size. I'd take
    >>high strength composite fiber/plastics (NOT fiberglass!) if they ever
    >>start making cars with them (oops, sorry, that was an inadvertent cue
    >>for RichA to enter the thread with his obsession), but until then, I
    >>want METAL around me. The more the better.
    >>
    >>Ever seen a serious wreck? Ever been in one?


    > Yes, I've been in one from which I was lucky to get out alive. Can't
    > say it changed my view (if anything, it enhanced my opinion that how a
    > car handles is more important than how robust it is). I agree that if a
    > tank hits me then it's better to be in another tank, though.
    >
    >>From 1979 to 1996, I worked as a professional, full time paramedic (in
    >>Portland, OR and other places), and the last 6 years was also a
    >>firefighter. I've _seen_ (and sometimes had to scrape up) the
    >>difference in outcomes.
    >>
    >>Sorry, but to hell with fuel economy... with the millions of people on
    >>the road in this country who merely know "how to operate a motor
    >>vehicle" as opposed to actually knowing how to _drive_ their vehicles
    >>(and there is a HUGE difference between those two skillsets), I want a
    >>tank around me, if possible. Again, damn straight I prefer a vehicle
    >>with some substance to it rather than today's tin cans that a wrinkle
    >>in the sheet metal causes major loss of body integrity and strength
    >>(literally).

    >
    > Well, we have very different priorities in cars, I must admit.


    My car must be big enough to hold my big DSLR and all
    the lenses I carry ;-)

    Roger
     
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Dec 21, 2006
    #13
  14. Re: End of an Era

    jeremy wrote:
    > "David Kilpatrick" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> jeremy wrote:
    >>> Well, many of us sensed that it was coming.
    >>>
    >>> Pentax had been a longtime user of Hoya optical glass, but to see Hoya
    >>> swallow Pentax us is disconcerting.
    >>>

    >> They had already swallowed a big chunk of Pentax, as their subsidiary
    >> brand Tokina makes most of the popular lenses (not the special stuff)
    >>
    >> David

    >
    > I was hoping that Pentax might release a full crop digital body that would
    > take their older 35mm lenses, but that appears to be a pipe dream now. Time
    > to start looking for a new camera brand.

    I don't know about that - with the new company having approximately 20x
    the capitalisation of Pentax, I think the chances of them progressing
    more rapidly are significantly higher. There is nothing wrong with
    Hoya/Tokina optics, and now they have a camera system to match their
    stuff to. With more money to throw around for things like R&D,
    marketing, and quite possibly some new high end gear, the brand can only
    improve. Before you jump ship, just remember that Canon don't have
    approx 70% market share (in Australia at least, not sure about rest of
    the world) because they are any better than the competition, it's simply
    because they have been marketed better.
    >
    >
     
    Graham Fountain, Dec 21, 2006
    #14
  15. RiceHigh

    J. Clarke Guest

    Re: End of an Era

    On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 07:12:15 +1000, Graham Fountain wrote:

    > jeremy wrote:
    >> "David Kilpatrick" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> jeremy wrote:
    >>>> Well, many of us sensed that it was coming.
    >>>>
    >>>> Pentax had been a longtime user of Hoya optical glass, but to see Hoya
    >>>> swallow Pentax us is disconcerting.
    >>>>
    >>> They had already swallowed a big chunk of Pentax, as their subsidiary
    >>> brand Tokina makes most of the popular lenses (not the special stuff)
    >>>
    >>> David

    >>
    >> I was hoping that Pentax might release a full crop digital body that would
    >> take their older 35mm lenses, but that appears to be a pipe dream now. Time
    >> to start looking for a new camera brand.

    > I don't know about that - with the new company having approximately 20x
    > the capitalisation of Pentax, I think the chances of them progressing
    > more rapidly are significantly higher. There is nothing wrong with
    > Hoya/Tokina optics, and now they have a camera system to match their
    > stuff to. With more money to throw around for things like R&D,
    > marketing, and quite possibly some new high end gear, the brand can only
    > improve. Before you jump ship, just remember that Canon don't have
    > approx 70% market share (in Australia at least, not sure about rest of
    > the world) because they are any better than the competition, it's simply
    > because they have been marketed better.


    There's also the little matter that they have a camera and lens for just
    about any niche you can imagine, while the competition doesn't.
    >>
    >>


    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
     
    J. Clarke, Dec 21, 2006
    #15
  16. RiceHigh

    just bob Guest

    Re: End of an Era

    "Pudentame" <> wrote in message
    news:458ae540$0$27111$...
    > RichA wrote:
    >>
    >> Recent study on the news the other night. You are twice as likely to
    >> die in an accident
    >> with a small car than a large one, internal compensation devices
    >> (airbags) nothwithstanding.
    >>

    >
    > OTOH, my own experience indicates a smaller, more nimble vehicle allows
    > the driver avoid accidents he might not be able to avoid in a larger,
    > heavier, less maneuverable automobile.


    I'm not worried about me being able to get out of the way, I'm worried about
    the teenagers, alcoholics or both who I never see coming.
     
    just bob, Dec 21, 2006
    #16
  17. RiceHigh

    Pudentame Guest

    Re: End of an Era

    jeremy wrote:
    > "Pudentame" <> wrote in message
    > news:458ae4b4$0$27111$...
    >> jeremy wrote:
    >>> Well, many of us sensed that it was coming.
    >>>
    >>> Pentax had been a longtime user of Hoya optical glass, but to see Hoya
    >>> swallow Pentax us is disconcerting.
    >>>
    >>> These mergers nearly always result in big changes, and I would not be
    >>> surprised if the "Pentax" name disappears entirely over the next few
    >>> years.
    >>>

    >> Actually, the "Pentax" name is one of the more valuable things Hoya's
    >> getting from the deal. I expect they'll be keeping it at least in the
    >> photography business.
    >>
    >> The driving factor behind the merger appears to be Pentax and Hoya
    >> combining their efforts in the medical imaging field.
    >>

    >
    > No, the driving factor is that Pentax has lagged behind Canon and Nikon in
    > the digital camera business, and is now having to deal with competition from
    > companies that previously had not entered the camera business, like Sony,
    > Panasonic, Casio and HP. Pentax screwed up, big-time, and they are no
    > longer viable.


    Well, press release I saw made a lot less mention of the digital camera
    business than it did of medical imaging.
     
    Pudentame, Dec 22, 2006
    #17
  18. RiceHigh

    Ken Lucke Guest

    Re: End of an Era

    In article <458b1c45$0$68989$>, just bob
    <kilbyfan@aoldotcom> wrote:

    > "Pudentame" <> wrote in message
    > news:458ae540$0$27111$...
    > > RichA wrote:
    > >>
    > >> Recent study on the news the other night. You are twice as likely to
    > >> die in an accident
    > >> with a small car than a large one, internal compensation devices
    > >> (airbags) nothwithstanding.
    > >>

    > >
    > > OTOH, my own experience indicates a smaller, more nimble vehicle allows
    > > the driver avoid accidents he might not be able to avoid in a larger,
    > > heavier, less maneuverable automobile.

    >
    > I'm not worried about me being able to get out of the way, I'm worried about
    > the teenagers, alcoholics or both who I never see coming.
    >


    Ayup. It ain't how good you are, it's how bad they are. The lowest
    common denominator is the one you have to worry about here, 'cause they
    can come from nowhere when you don't even have the time to react, let
    alone defend.

    It's like handing Joe Luser off of the street a DSLR in auto-program
    mode and saying "go take some pictures" and handing a photographically
    skilled individual the same camera and saying "photograph me a
    masterpiece", then comparing the results. 50% of it is the workspace
    between the ears, 40% of it is meaningful experience, and the last 10%
    is just dumb luck. Most "drivers" on the road in this country today
    rely mostly on the last 10% to get them through. The way I see some
    "drivers" "drive", I wonder how they have lived as long as they have.

    As I noted elsewhere, a majority of it is a problem of people not being
    taught how to _drive_ properly, but rather how to "operate a motor
    vehicle" and how to pass the "drivers'" license test.

    Then there are the "just plain stupid" variety, like the lady I saw the
    other day, doing about 25 in a 55 zone, and when I finally got room to
    pass her (5 miles & 10 minutes down the road), she waa READING A
    F*^^&*KING BOOK while she was "driving".

    --
    You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a
    reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating
    the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for
    independence.
    -- Charles A. Beard
     
    Ken Lucke, Dec 22, 2006
    #18
  19. RiceHigh

    Frank ess Guest

    Re: End of an Era

    Ken Lucke wrote:
    > In article <458b1c45$0$68989$>, just bob
    > <kilbyfan@aoldotcom> wrote:
    >
    >> "Pudentame" <> wrote in message
    >> news:458ae540$0$27111$...
    >>> RichA wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> Recent study on the news the other night. You are twice as
    >>>> likely
    >>>> to die in an accident
    >>>> with a small car than a large one, internal compensation devices
    >>>> (airbags) nothwithstanding.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> OTOH, my own experience indicates a smaller, more nimble vehicle
    >>> allows the driver avoid accidents he might not be able to avoid in
    >>> a larger, heavier, less maneuverable automobile.

    >>
    >> I'm not worried about me being able to get out of the way, I'm
    >> worried about the teenagers, alcoholics or both who I never see
    >> coming.
    >>

    >
    > Ayup. It ain't how good you are, it's how bad they are. The lowest
    > common denominator is the one you have to worry about here, 'cause
    > they can come from nowhere when you don't even have the time to
    > react, let alone defend.
    >
    > It's like handing Joe Luser off of the street a DSLR in auto-program
    > mode and saying "go take some pictures" and handing a
    > photographically
    > skilled individual the same camera and saying "photograph me a
    > masterpiece", then comparing the results. 50% of it is the
    > workspace
    > between the ears, 40% of it is meaningful experience, and the last
    > 10%
    > is just dumb luck. Most "drivers" on the road in this country today
    > rely mostly on the last 10% to get them through. The way I see some
    > "drivers" "drive", I wonder how they have lived as long as they
    > have.
    >
    > As I noted elsewhere, a majority of it is a problem of people not
    > being taught how to _drive_ properly, but rather how to "operate a
    > motor vehicle" and how to pass the "drivers'" license test.
    >
    > Then there are the "just plain stupid" variety, like the lady I saw
    > the other day, doing about 25 in a 55 zone, and when I finally got
    > room to pass her (5 miles & 10 minutes down the road), she waa
    > READING A F*^^&*KING BOOK while she was "driving".


    See here:
    http://home.san.rr.com/fsheff/incars.htm

    --
    Frank ess
     
    Frank ess, Dec 22, 2006
    #19
  20. RiceHigh

    Ken Lucke Guest

    Re: End of an Era

    In article <>, Frank ess
    <> wrote:

    > Ken Lucke wrote:
    > > In article <458b1c45$0$68989$>, just bob
    > > <kilbyfan@aoldotcom> wrote:
    > >
    > >> "Pudentame" <> wrote in message
    > >> news:458ae540$0$27111$...
    > >>> RichA wrote:
    > >>>>
    > >>>> Recent study on the news the other night. You are twice as
    > >>>> likely
    > >>>> to die in an accident
    > >>>> with a small car than a large one, internal compensation devices
    > >>>> (airbags) nothwithstanding.
    > >>>>
    > >>>
    > >>> OTOH, my own experience indicates a smaller, more nimble vehicle
    > >>> allows the driver avoid accidents he might not be able to avoid in
    > >>> a larger, heavier, less maneuverable automobile.
    > >>
    > >> I'm not worried about me being able to get out of the way, I'm
    > >> worried about the teenagers, alcoholics or both who I never see
    > >> coming.
    > >>

    > >
    > > Ayup. It ain't how good you are, it's how bad they are. The lowest
    > > common denominator is the one you have to worry about here, 'cause
    > > they can come from nowhere when you don't even have the time to
    > > react, let alone defend.
    > >
    > > It's like handing Joe Luser off of the street a DSLR in auto-program
    > > mode and saying "go take some pictures" and handing a
    > > photographically
    > > skilled individual the same camera and saying "photograph me a
    > > masterpiece", then comparing the results. 50% of it is the
    > > workspace
    > > between the ears, 40% of it is meaningful experience, and the last
    > > 10%
    > > is just dumb luck. Most "drivers" on the road in this country today
    > > rely mostly on the last 10% to get them through. The way I see some
    > > "drivers" "drive", I wonder how they have lived as long as they
    > > have.
    > >
    > > As I noted elsewhere, a majority of it is a problem of people not
    > > being taught how to _drive_ properly, but rather how to "operate a
    > > motor vehicle" and how to pass the "drivers'" license test.
    > >
    > > Then there are the "just plain stupid" variety, like the lady I saw
    > > the other day, doing about 25 in a 55 zone, and when I finally got
    > > room to pass her (5 miles & 10 minutes down the road), she waa
    > > READING A F*^^&*KING BOOK while she was "driving".

    >
    > See here:
    > http://home.san.rr.com/fsheff/incars.htm



    Yep - I think I know some of those people. At least, I think I've been
    behind them :^)



    And you can always tell when the cell phone's in use by the cocked
    angle of the head from behind. Why do people think they have to "lean
    into" the phone? [probably for the same reason that they think a) that
    they have to shout into it because they can't hear it well so
    naturally, neither can the person on the other end*, and b) that the
    rest of us are interested in the least in listening to their half of
    the conversation in places like supermarkets and restaurants - i.e.,
    stupidity, or lack of consideration for others]




    * I'm reminded of the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal [c.f. Douglas
    Adams], the most mind-numbingly stupid creature in the universe... as
    any HHGTTG aficianado should know, it is so stupid that it thinks that
    if YOU can't see IT, then IT can't see YOU, and so the way to escape
    being eaten by it is to put your towel (you do have it with you, don't
    you?) over your head.

    --
    You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a
    reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating
    the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for
    independence.
    -- Charles A. Beard
     
    Ken Lucke, Dec 22, 2006
    #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. pcbutts1

    De la Hoya got robbed

    pcbutts1, Sep 14, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    416
    Boomer
    Sep 14, 2003
  2. Nicolae Fieraru
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    936
    Gary L. Burnore
    Apr 11, 2005
  3. Daniel Silevitch

    Pelican swallows pigeon

    Daniel Silevitch, Oct 26, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    31
    Views:
    1,009
    Paul Heslop
    Oct 31, 2006
  4. map

    hoya and pentax merging

    map, Dec 21, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    296
  5. Pentax and Hoya merger scrapped

    , Apr 10, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    271
Loading...

Share This Page