Sigma rumors.

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Dan Sullivan, Dec 31, 2003.

  1. Dan Sullivan

    Jeff Shoaf Guest

    Can you link to any credible source that say's the dReb is made of "low
    grade plastic"? And a Google search that mainly shows your postings
    doesn't count...

    Do you know what polycarbonate is? It's plastic...

    Mentions of dropping the dReb:
    What does price have to do with depth of focus and/or focusing problems?
    I never claimed the SD9 has focusing problems - you claimed that the dReb
    has a pretty well known problem with focusing. Where's the link(s)?
    I have. You responded with a critique that basically said it just wasn't
    a Fovean image... You also said something about "Bayer blurriness" in
    part of the image that was slightly out of focus due to the DOF.

    You still haven't linked to anything saying there's a focusing issue with
    the dReb. I can link to many images that show good focusing with both the
    dReb and the 10D (they don't have to be full-sized to show focusing
    issues), but that doesn't disprove that there is a focusing issue.

    It's up to you to provide a link showing a focusing issue with the dReb.

    Specifics, George. Why does the dReb get a "2"? What build quality issues
    do you see?

    In his review on DPReview, Phil say's the color isn't his "cup of tea",
    but the camera can obviously take some knocks. He also says the build
    quality is good.
    Jeff Shoaf, Jan 12, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Dan Sullivan

    Jeff Shoaf Guest

    I just read it. It doesn't mention the 300D or the Digital Rebel or the
    Digital "Kiss". If it doesn't mention the 300D, how can the page state that
    the 300D is made of "low grade plastic".

    It's one thing when you link to images to prove a point and others don't
    agree that the image makes the point you intend since a lot of visual
    subjects are subject to subjective analysis, but it's a totally different
    thing to link to pages with text to prove that the text states something
    and then the text doesn't even mention what you're saying.
    Jeff Shoaf, Jan 12, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. Dan Sullivan

    JPS Guest

    In message <[email protected]>,
    Of course, absolute color is a function of the RAW converter as much as
    it is a function of the camera. If you don't like the relative
    saturation of different colors on the 300D, you can set up a workflow
    that changes that globally. That's much different from the Sigma SD
    cameras, where the color is internally inconsistent within the image.
    JPS, Jan 12, 2004

    Second paragraph. It even clarifies that polycarbonate is a type of
    "high-impact plastic".

    Also, polycarbonate isn't the entirely the bad thing that you make it
    out to be, since it actually has very high impact strength and the
    "give" you cite as a weakness actually provides a small cushioning
    effect, potentially reducing impact damage. But why take it from me
    since there are plenty of definitions spidered by Google:

    Andy Blanchard, Jan 12, 2004
  5. Dan Sullivan

    Jeff Shoaf Guest

    Phil was referring to the silver color of the camera. He had nothing but
    positive remarks for the 300D's image quality and color.

    But your point is valid...
    Jeff Shoaf, Jan 12, 2004
  6. Dan Sullivan

    Mark M Guest

    Really? It clearly interests you, Georgie.
    Mark M, Jan 13, 2004
  7. Dan Sullivan

    Lionel Guest

    This is a lie.
    This is a lie.
    This is rather stupid, & extremely unlikely.
    This is a lie.
    Not only is this a lie, it demonstrates 'George's mental health
    Lionel, Jan 13, 2004
  8. I did. You obviously did not. Post proof that the above page states
    the exact phrase, "The 300D is made of low grade plastic" or be proven
    a liar yet again.


    No response from George, proven a liar for the 3rd time today.

    No response from George, proven a liar for the 4th time today.

    No response from George, proven a liar for the 5th time today.

    No response from George, since he was caught in his own poor use of
    logic and can't find any response.

    No response from George, who was hopelessly confused by now, and
    ashamed at being proven a liar five times today (by me alone, plus
    dozens of others...)

    No response from George, who is too ashamed to remember to snip this
    accusation, as he does anything else he finds inconvenient.
    The Black Sheep, Jan 13, 2004
  9. Dan Sullivan

    JPS Guest

    In message <bu1a30$cbfnq$>,
    I'm convinced that SteveGeorge's mind works like this; you take a
    statement which is assumed to be true, and you choose the connotations
    you like, and support your viewpoint. From that, you paraphrase, and
    come up with another statement assumed to be true. From that one, you
    again choose your favored connotations, and this goes on and on until
    the rest of the world sees you out on a limb far from the trunk of
    reality, but you are making perfect sense to yourself.

    If language is a virus from outer space, George is one of its biggest
    victims. He doesn't seem to have a *CLUE* that language is a tool for
    communication, and is not perfect. He takes advantage of the
    imperfections to slip in his own interpretation, in which he paints
    everything around him. He has no desire to know what is true; what is
    lit by the lamp in his brain is all that exists.
    JPS, Jan 13, 2004
  10. Dan Sullivan

    Mike Engles Guest


    Not wishing to be rude, but are you by any chance also describing
    yourself, your own beliefs and certainties.

    Mike Engles
    Mike Engles, Jan 13, 2004
  11. Try the reading 300D page this time, the S2 is also polycarbonate like the
    SD9/10. You liinked the S2 page, above. It's the 300D that is cheap
    George Preddy, Jan 13, 2004
  12. Sheehy posts under at least 4 different aliases here.
    George Preddy, Jan 13, 2004
  13. Dan Sullivan

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    No. That doesn't describe me at all. I learn, when confronted with
    evidence. I desire to know how things really work, not to tell them how
    they work.

    You're confusing what I wrote with the description of a person who has
    an opinion. Unlike Steve, my opinions are negotiable and flexible. I
    drop dead-end ideas when they prove to be wrong.

    JPS, Jan 13, 2004
  14. Dan Sullivan

    JPS Guest

    In message <bu1qpl$dhr$>,
    Really? What are they?

    The last time I posted without my real name was about 7 years ago, to
    make a joke.
    JPS, Jan 13, 2004
  15. It was YOUR link. Stop playing games and jumping around, you got
    caught in a lie, live with it.
    The Black Sheep, Jan 13, 2004
  16. I see one flaw in your otherwise excellent hypothesis. You assume
    Georgie's mind *works*.
    The Black Sheep, Jan 13, 2004
  17. You've actually provided more evidence than anyone in this newsgroup when
    you said you will never post an image from your 10D, because it isn't good
    enough. The lack of a picture is worth more than all of your words.
    George Preddy, Jan 14, 2004
  18. That says polycarbonate. The S2 isn't built by Canon as you seem to think.
    I linked the 300D page which says it is made of low grade plastic (because
    it is). The 300D is built to very low end prosumer standards. Infact most
    prosumers are much better built.
    Right, the 300D is built with the same polycarbonate material as the SD9 as
    S2 Pro because you say so. You do realize that this isn't a matter of
    opinion right?
    George Preddy, Jan 14, 2004
  19. What part are you having trouble seeing?
    George Preddy, Jan 14, 2004
  20. Steve's does get it wrong there, you are right. Dpreview is more detailed
    and specific, and clearly says the 300D is made of low end plastic. Look at
    each DSLR review and you'll see the difference. From imaging-resource...

    "The biggest concession in the design of the Digital Rebel seems to be a
    much more extensive use of plastic in its body construction than we've seen
    in any previous Canon D-SLR. This is one of the few aspects of the camera
    that I personally disliked, as I felt that it gave it a rather cheap,
    "plasticky" feel in the hand."

    "Feel" really isn't the problem though, these big cameras take a lot of
    abuse, the dR is simply too cheaply built to stand up to serious use. Just
    pick one up at your local K-Mart and you'll see how poorly the 300D is
    built, really to the lowest end of common prosumer standards. It is not a
    common DSLR in this sense, all of which (with the possible exception of the
    lighter duty, but still 300D embarrassing, D100) are built like tanks.
    George Preddy, Jan 14, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.