Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Pentax

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 26, 2006, 5:20 AM   #31
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Quote:

I already commented on the possibility that he was a sock puppet troll........

:O


Seriously, how far can you go really... You can go on assuming about me, but I don't think thatyoucan ever get it right. (I just don't know what are you all trying to prove)

I suggest an I.P. address check to satisfy you all guys a bit.

BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2006, 7:42 AM   #32
TC3
Senior Member
 
TC3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,169
Default

Yawn:roll:
TC3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2006, 8:26 AM   #33
Senior Member
 
oreo57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 152
Default

It was semi-sarcastic remark. I do not believe you and RH are the same person.
Glad your back.........keeps things interesting:P

Now for the meat of the matter:
IF YOU READ THE article it states, fairly clearly that Pentax was the second worst camera, no crown for Pentax , the're second runner up to the Polaroid. Both RH and Pentax lfe read it wrong (please correct me if I am wrong, I can take it
Not that it really matters, second worst is not something to be proud of......
What really bugs me is a man of science not going back to the original source material to verify the statements, nor actually reading and understanding that material.......... Don't you get it, bad logic, tabloid type announcements, ect.
RH sometimes reflects the attitude of someone who's idol worship has been shattered...many conflicting emotions. "I love them " I hate them" ect. Actually he's the worst type of blind brand loyalist, he wants his idol restored, pedestal and all, and is going to great lengths to accomplish this..... keep bashing them, the'll come around, they have to see the error of their ways" oh dear, oh my"... type of stuff. It's truely sad to see.
Healthy people know that any product/line can have a dog. It's just part of life. Only idol worshippers would consider this THE END OF THE LINE for Pentax, They should be spending millions correcting there mistake, at the least apologise or bow down and cleanse themselves to the "faithful"..... Baah
And ,
Ben, sometimes I think your posts are NOT serious, you are just agreeing for fun (and in a small way I am hoping for your sake this is true.) Well knock it off.

And BUY A FREAKING CAMERA... by the time your "research" is concluded, everything will change.


BenjaminXYZ wrote:
Quote:
Quote:

I already commented on the possibility that he was a sock puppet troll........

:O


Seriously, how far can you go really... You can go on assuming about me, but I don't think thatyoucan ever get it right. (I just don't know what are you all trying to prove)

I suggest an I.P. address check to satisfy you all guys a bit.
oreo57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2006, 10:10 AM   #34
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Quote:

Ben, sometimes I think your posts are NOT serious, you are just agreeing for fun (and in a small way I am hoping for your sake this is true.) Well knock it off.

And BUY A FREAKING CAMERA... by the time your "research" is concluded, everything will change.
OK, I am sorry if I hadbeen annoyingyou guys with my post(s) in this Pentax forum. :G

BTW, my next camera is not going to be a "FREAKING CAMERA"!! :-)

Regards!
BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2006, 10:18 AM   #35
Senior Member
 
oreo57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 152
Default

How come?.. I hear "freaking cameras" have no exposure or white balance issues. Hear they actually run out of your house when they smell a good photo op... All from the comfort of your pedestal....Sorry couldn't resist....:evil:

BenjaminXYZ wrote:
Quote:
Quote:

Ben, sometimes I think your posts are NOT serious, you are just agreeing for fun (and in a small way I am hoping for your sake this is true.) Well knock it off.

And BUY A FREAKING CAMERA... by the time your "research" is concluded, everything will change.
OK, I am sorry if I hadbeen annoyingyou guys with my post(s) in this Pentax forum. :G

BTW, my next camera is not going to be a "FREAKING CAMERA"!! :-)

Regards!
oreo57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2006, 11:00 AM   #36
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

IF Pentax have a nice zoom that starts at F/2.8and cost $500 & below, +there's a full review & test of it; Iwill most probably be going fora Pentax dSLR such as thePentax *ist DS!! I like that compactdSLR with it's sharp screen and bright viewfinder. But no suitable lens boohoo.





BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2006, 11:41 AM   #37
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

The sign over the entrance to most major engineering schools should read....Please leave brain at the door...Not needed here!

Dawg
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2006, 1:07 PM   #38
Senior Member
 
Catbells's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 874
Default

BenjaminXYZ wrote:
Quote:
I just don't know why you Pentax owners are just so over protective overyour things
I don't necessarily think that we are, BUT maybe we do get rather upset when Pentax is bashed just for being Pentax.

i.e. Look at the review for *istDS at DP Review & you'll see what I mean. That review slates Pentax for it's poor JPEG quality; something that it's done so effectively, that most now believe it - that review went into such detail against Pentax which has NEVER been carried out on any other camera since - why?. At the same time when the Canon 350 was released, DP Review couldn't praise it enough BUT when test images from both cameras were compared, Pentax, IMHO, came out marginally better (and with 6M not 8M pixels).

So, if we appear a tad sensitive, it's perhaps because we have to stick up for ourselves now & again.

Footnote: Soft images are intentional for top end cameras - something that I found difficult to accept initially, especially when paying much more than for a 'point & shoot' compact. By leaving the image in it's near 'virgin' form, it allowed the user to post process to add sharpness, saturation etc to their specific needs which is something that can't be done on a heavily 'in camera' processed image - what's been added, can't be removed.

As dSRLs become more popular, there's a trend to 'beef up' the JPEG to make it instantly more appealing - to this end the Nikon D50 & now the Pentax K100 appear to have joined this trend.
Catbells is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2006, 6:10 PM   #39
Senior Member
 
oreo57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 152
Default

Actually I could show you where to get an 80-200 f2.8 zoom for under $300. It's in Canada... Manual focus only though. And for around $500 you can find a used Tokina 80-200 f.8 autofocus.........................

Can you please point me to ANOTHER brand that offers a 2.8 zoom for under $500?........................ You've got me curious.





BenjaminXYZ wrote:
Quote:
IF Pentax have a nice zoom that starts at F/2.8and cost $500 & below, +there's a full review & test of it; Iwill most probably be going fora Pentax dSLR such as thePentax *ist DS!! I like that compactdSLR with it's sharp screen and bright viewfinder. But no suitable lens boohoo.




oreo57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2006, 11:29 PM   #40
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default



Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:07 AM.