Re: A newbie request help selecting digital camera

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by sligoNoSPAMjoe@hotmail.com, Jun 13, 2009.

  1. Guest

    On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 17:07:29 -0500, Kris Krieger <>
    wrote:

    >Hello!
    >
    >I've been using a nice Minolta with Fuji ASA 100 film and a modest telephoto
    >lens. I've occasionalyl gotten some very decent nature photos, but have had
    >trouble getting the hnag of exposure times - and it costs more and more to
    >develop "experiments".


    I have to say you seem to know what you want and are headed in
    the right general direction.

    You have also gotten some good advice and I believe you can
    weed out what applies to you and what does not.

    I will make on suggestion. Many of the contributors here are
    tend to think in terms of their own personal wants and needs and fail
    to recognize that other people don't always share their needs. Many
    of us are professionals or advanced armatures. Often we may be more
    interested in how to photograph a subject that the actual results.

    Often the typical Consumer Reports or other general media
    evaluation or recommendations are overlooked or rejected, when they
    are very good sources for the average photographer. You seem to fit
    in the middle somewhere, so I suggest you review both sets of
    recommendations and then make up your own mind.
     
    , Jun 13, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. John Navas Guest

    On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 09:19:30 -0400, wrote in
    <>:

    > I will make on suggestion. Many of the contributors here are
    >tend to think in terms of their own personal wants and needs and fail
    >to recognize that other people don't always share their needs. Many
    >of us are professionals or advanced armatures.


    Some, but most are really just wannabes.

    >Often we may be more
    >interested in how to photograph a subject that the actual results.


    Then, and with all due respect, you're not even an advanced amateur,
    much less a professional.

    "Every time someone tells me how sharp my photos are, I assume that it
    isn't a very interesting photograph. If it were, they would have more to
    say." ~Author Unknown

    > Often the typical Consumer Reports or other general media
    >evaluation or recommendations are overlooked or rejected, when they
    >are very good sources for the average photographer. You seem to fit
    >in the middle somewhere, so I suggest you review both sets of
    >recommendations and then make up your own mind.


    CR is a good general consumer resource, but does a poor job of
    evaluating specialized products like audio gear (especially speakers),
    cameras, and the like. Much better advice is contained in reviews by
    qualified reviewers, which are readily available on the Internet.
    Some of the best (IMHO):
    * http://www.dpreview.com
    * http://www.cameralabs.com
    * http://www.imaging-resource.com
    * http://www.steves-digicams.com
    * http://www.dcresource.com

    --
    Best regards,
    John
    Panasonic DMC-FZ28 (and several others)
     
    John Navas, Jun 13, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. ASAAR Guest

    On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 07:18:46 -0700, John Navas wrote:

    >> Often we may be more interested in how to photograph
    >> a subject that the actual results.

    >
    > Then, and with all due respect, you're not even an advanced amateur,
    > much less a professional.


    How unfortunate that you've returned after slinking away in
    disgrace many months ago. As usual, with your penchant to seek
    things to blindly criticize, you didn't understand the thought
    behind the words and took a too literal interpretation, a weakness
    of yours. The "we" was intended to mean "many in this newsgroup".
    It wasn't self referential, as you've chosen to twist the meaning.
     
    ASAAR, Jun 13, 2009
    #3
  4. Bob Larter Guest

    Troll Spotter wrote:
    > On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 12:59:59 -0400, ASAAR <> wrote:
    >
    >> On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 07:18:46 -0700, John Navas wrote:
    >>
    >>>> Often we may be more interested in how to photograph
    >>>> a subject that the actual results.
    >>> Then, and with all due respect, you're not even an advanced amateur,
    >>> much less a professional.

    >> How unfortunate that you've returned after slinking away in
    >> disgrace many months ago. As usual, with your penchant to seek
    >> things to blindly criticize, you didn't understand the thought
    >> behind the words and took a too literal interpretation, a weakness
    >> of yours. The "we" was intended to mean "many in this newsgroup".
    >> It wasn't self referential, as you've chosen to twist the meaning.

    >
    > ASSAR, don't you have another camera manual that you can download and read
    > so you can pretend to have used that camera too? That'll still make zero
    > cameras that you've ever actually owned and used. You virtual-life trolls
    > are a hoot. Anyone who's ever taken even one photograph with an Instamatic
    > can see right through your pretend-photographer act. Most children grow out
    > of playing-pretend by the time they are 5 or 6. Are you 6 yet? And please
    > refrain from using the word "we" when referring to your own inane beliefs
    > and ideas founded on a ignorant lifetime of text-only experiences. The only
    > "we" that you belong to are the other dozen or so pretend-photographer
    > trolls that infest this newsgroup, spewing their nonsense too.


    Still waiting to see some of your P&S shots, kook.

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Bob Larter, Jun 14, 2009
    #4
  5. John Navas Guest

    On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 14:23:06 +1000, Bob Larter <>
    wrote in <4a347b2b$>:

    >Still waiting to see some of your P&S shots, kook.


    You've long since made your point, whatever it is.
    If you keep posting this over and over you'll be killfiled as a spammer.

    --
    Best regards,
    John
    Panasonic DMC-FZ28 (and several others)
     
    John Navas, Jun 14, 2009
    #5
  6. nospam Guest

    In article <>, John Navas
    <> wrote:

    > On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 14:23:06 +1000, Bob Larter <>
    > wrote in <4a347b2b$>:
    >
    > >Still waiting to see some of your P&S shots, kook.

    >
    > You've long since made your point, whatever it is.
    > If you keep posting this over and over you'll be killfiled as a spammer.


    you've got the wrong person
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2009
    #6
  7. John Navas Guest

    On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 10:46:59 -0400, nospam <> wrote
    in <140620091046595624%>:

    >In article <>, John Navas
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 14:23:06 +1000, Bob Larter <>
    >> wrote in <4a347b2b$>:
    >>
    >> >Still waiting to see some of your P&S shots, kook.

    >>
    >> You've long since made your point, whatever it is.
    >> If you keep posting this over and over you'll be killfiled as a spammer.

    >
    >you've got the wrong person


    I've actually got them all.

    --
    Best regards,
    John
    Panasonic DMC-FZ28 (and several others)
     
    John Navas, Jun 14, 2009
    #7
  8. John Navas Guest

    On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 00:16:11 -0500, Kris Krieger <> wrote
    in <Xns9C2B2BE9AB87meadowmuffin@216.168.3.70>:

    >John Navas <> wrote in
    >news::
    >
    >[...]
    >>
    >> CR is a good general consumer resource, but does a poor job of
    >> evaluating specialized products like audio gear (especially speakers),
    >> cameras, and the like. Much better advice is contained in reviews by
    >> qualified reviewers, which are readily available on the Internet.
    >> Some of the best (IMHO):
    >> * http://www.dpreview.com
    >> * http://www.cameralabs.com
    >> * http://www.imaging-resource.com
    >> * http://www.steves-digicams.com
    >> * http://www.dcresource.com

    >
    >THanks for the links!, all are now saved =:-D


    One thing that's not been emphasized enough in the advice you've gotten
    is that *glass matters* (more than photosite size) in *all* cameras, and
    there are crap lenses on some compact digital cameras just as there are
    crap lenses for dSLR cameras.

    There are also superb lenses on other compact digital cameras that
    actually *outperform* dSLR lenses even at many times the price, of which
    the Leica-branded lenses on Panasonic Lumix cameras and Canon L-series
    lenses are good examples.

    --
    Best regards,
    John
    Panasonic DMC-FZ28 (and several others)
     
    John Navas, Jun 16, 2009
    #8
    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. ASAAR
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    290
    dj_nme
    Jun 16, 2009
  2. Matt Ion

    Re: A newbie request help selecting digital camera

    Matt Ion, Jun 13, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    26
    Views:
    599
    nick c
    Jun 16, 2009
  3. tony cooper

    Re: A newbie request help selecting digital camera

    tony cooper, Jun 13, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    448
    Matt Ion
    Jun 18, 2009
  4. Bob Larter

    Re: A newbie request help selecting digital camera

    Bob Larter, Jun 13, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    38
    Views:
    895
    dj_nme
    Jun 20, 2009
  5. Tzortzakakis Dimitrios

    Re: A newbie request help selecting digital camera

    Tzortzakakis Dimitrios, Jun 13, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    28
    Views:
    695
    John Turco
    Jun 22, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page