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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 27, 2006, 9:34 AM   #51
Senior Member
 
oreo57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 152
Default

People are always defending their brand for the same reason you are always pointing out the faults in Pentax, because they can.....and I do consider them as silly as your logic.:-)

Your sensationalizing (and NEVER admitting to it) the article (as Pentax life did)is why it is always pointless to argue with you..... Just admit that the Optio was actually second worst as stated in the ORIGINAL SOURCE documents. Go ahead and say it. They thought about making Pentax number one......:-)

It's a $100 camera and apparenty, when you read the user reviews, some people that actually LIKE it... go figure. Poor deluded souls......:shock:Unfortunately that is also your attitude towords them. Reason 2 to never argue with you.....your way to full of yourself and your worth and if somethings bad to you, you just can't understand that to others it's JUST NOT AN ISSUE...... sorry.

I read your letter to Pentax and sorry you never got a response. S&*t happens. Live with it, or try again. Your right and your choice. Personally, your letter means nothing to me. Don't take that personal, it's just it's not my problems, my issues and you have absolutely no right to make them mine.:!:

When it comes to Pentax, I'm as much of a psychologist as you are an OPTICAL engineer.

As to being a victim, if the camera did what I wanted to I certainy wouldn't take any bad press as a sign I screwed up.. Human babble is just not that important to me to influence my choice. I may look at the camera a bit more criticaland see what everyone was talking about but it wouldn't change much. Now someone constantly screaming in my ear. "the cameras bad" the cameras bad" , "the cameras bad" could be annoying and lead to a conditioned response to suddenly believe "the cameras bad". Doesn't take a psychologist to see that constant reinforcement of a position can do damage.

The worst of the worst was based on user reviews and who complains more? YOU are well qualified to answer that question. OK a hint, disgrunteled people. I'm not going to look for reviews ect. Actually the Canon in the article is much more insidious. Hidden defects, high failure rate after x amount of time. THAT would annoy me more than shutter lag, which if I was smart, I would have checked out ahead of time. Go figure.





Another thought: There are probably some ball point pens ect with the Pentax name on them that failed to perform their function. Oh whoo is me....:evil:





RiceHigh wrote:


Quote:
oreo57 wrote:







[align=left]







[align=left]







[align=left]
[/align]
Quote:
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.
Are you a psychologist? Can you explain why some people are *always* being defensive of "their" brand, and regardless of what other people mention are true or not? Can your religionous "idol worship" theory explain all those behaviours?

[/align][/align]







[align=left]
Quote:
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
[/align]
But when there are dogs after dogs and one dog is "dogger" than the previous one.. What do u think?

Have you ever seen my letter to the CEO of Pentax Corporation?

http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh/A_...rporation.html

For the Pentax E10, it is simply something that should never been produced (by anyone in this world) and not to mention it wears a Pentax badge, what do you think again?

If you're one of the Pentax E10 victim, what would you think??? and react???

RiceHigh
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh
oreo57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2006, 10:36 AM   #52
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 344
Default

oreo57 wrote:
Quote:
People are always defending their brand for the same reason you are always pointing out the faults in Pentax, because they can.....and I do consider them as silly as your logic.:-)
[align=left]You said that I *always* point out faults but this is not true. I do praise Pentax's excellent optics from time to time and these "praisings" can be found many where in my website. Please don't put words in my mouth for what you like to!

[/align]
Quote:
Your sensationalizing (and NEVER admitting to it) the article (as Pentax life did)is why it is always pointless to argue with you..... Just admit that the Optio was actually second worst as stated in the ORIGINAL SOURCE documents. Go ahead and say it. They thought about making Pentax number one......:-)
[align=left]My intrepretation on the article is different from yours, what's the big deal? Everyone can go and read the article and think themselves.

The key point is whether even it is the first or the 1st runner up is not as important as Pentax did produce and does market a Piece of Junk.

[/align]
Quote:
It's a $100 camera and apparenty, when you read the user reviews, some people that actually LIKE it... go figure. Poor deluded souls......:shock:Unfortunately that is also your attitude towords them. Reason 2 to never argue with you.....your way to full of yourself and your worth and if somethings bad to you, you just can't understand that to others it's JUST NOT AN ISSUE...... sorry.
[align=left]I don't want to argue with you further as I think it is too meaningless too. I suggest all readers can go to the DC-HQ review page to read and count if really interested..

[/align]
Quote:
I read your letter to Pentax and sorry you never got a response. S&*t happens. Live with it, or try again. Your right and your choice. Personally, your letter means nothing to me. Don't take that personal, it's just it's not my problems, my issues and you have absolutely no right to make them mine.:!:
[align=left]Who say that I want to make my dog Pentax gear acquired as yours? I point out my letter to Pentax CEO as to tell about there are more and more dogs from Pentax than ever before.

[/align]
Quote:
When it comes to Pentax, I'm as much of a psychologist as you are an OPTICAL engineer.
[align=left]How come you knows that I'm an OPTICAL Engineer??

[/align]
Quote:
As to being a victim, if the camera did what I wanted to I certainy wouldn't take any bad press as a sign I screwed up.. Human babble is just not that important to me to influence my choice. I may look at the camera a bit more criticaland see what everyone was talking about but it wouldn't change much. Now someone constantly screaming in my ear. "the cameras bad" the cameras bad" , "the cameras bad" could be annoying and lead to a conditioned response to suddenly believe "the cameras bad". Doesn't take a psychologist to see that constant reinforcement of a position can do damage.
[align=left]Indeed, I want to find a true psychologist to explain the behaviour that blind brand Pentaxians see only the negative points I tell on the net, but never can see and quote the positive points about Pentax gear I posted in my website.

I say about many good things about my K100D in my full review, how often you guys notice and bash me about these??

The evidence is here, you're encouraged to read again!

http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh/K1...ll_Review.html

[/align]
Quote:
The worst of the worst was based on user reviews and who complains more? YOU are well qualified to answer that question. OK a hint, disgrunteled people. I'm not going to look for reviews ect. Actually the Canon in the article is much more insidious. Hidden defects, high failure rate after x amount of time. THAT would annoy me more than shutter lag, which if I was smart, I would have checked out ahead of time. Go figure.

[align=left]Okay, as I have said, I will argue with you no more on this minor point.

[/align]
Quote:

Another thought: There are probably some ball point pens ect with the Pentax name on them that failed to perform their function. Oh whoo is me....:evil:
[align=left][/align] Where to buy? Pls tell us!

RiceHigh
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh
RiceHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2006, 12:46 PM   #53
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 245
Default

Hey Rice, I think the underlying piont here is that you exaggerate too much. You make a huge deal out of miniscule details...

.01 becomes 230,457,823,578,234,958..."not good" becomes "HORRENDOUS"...etc.

Just examples :lol:

That's how your posts come across. But, people don't like that. And they react to it.
swgod98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2006, 2:40 PM   #54
Senior Member
 
oreo57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 152
Default

"You said that I *always* point out faults but this is not true. I do praise Pentax's excellent optics from time to time and these "praisings" can be found many where in my website. Please don't put words in my mouth for what you like to"

But not anything good about the cameras... Well within your rights. There are just as many praises for the cameras, you just disagee.

"My intrepretation on the article is different from yours, what's the big deal? Everyone can go and read the article and think themselves.

The key point is whether even it is the first or the 1st runner up is not as important as Pentax did produce and does market a Piece of Junk."



Your interpretation is FALSE and you refuse to admit it. THAT's the problem. A few users called it a piece of junk..... period. you are a living Pentax Tabloid...You cross posted this on another forum but at least tempered your post w/ a more thorough quote.

"Indeed, I want to find a true psychologist to explain the behaviour that blind brand Pentaxians see only the negative points I tell on the net, but never can see and quote the positive points about Pentax gear I posted in my website. "

I say about many good things about my K100D in my full review, how often you guys notice and bash me about these??

"The evidence is here, you're encouraged to read again!"


I have no faith in your evidence, one way or another. There are much better sources than your pseudo-science......and much wiser people. That is my choice to decide who and what to believe. This choice starts w/ the camera in my hand..and find little of value in your "methodology" as much as you would like others to believe in it, I for one, will not.

Where to buy? Pls tell us!

That was humor..............

And more food for thought regarding your pseudo-science. Please read it more carefully than you do articles...........


As noted, meters cannot and are not calibrated for that elusive density of mid grey in the characteristic curve. There are many assumptions here and it simply depends on every photographers typical subject brightness and development method to find the required density. The exposure meter is calibrated to some clearly defined standards and the user needs to adjust his working method and his subject matter to these values. It does not help to suppose all kinds of assumptions that do not exist.
http://www.imx.nl/photosite/technica...suremeter.html




oreo57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2006, 4:12 PM   #55
Senior Member
 
oreo57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 152
Default

K100D test, Mr Smarty pants:

..........................................The chart above shows consolidated results from spatial frequency response measurements in both the horizontal and vertical axes. The "MTF 50" numbers tend to correlate best with visual perceptions of sharpness, so those are what I focus on here. The uncorrected resolution figures are 1070 line widths per picture height horizontally and 787 lw/ph vertically. Correcting to a "standardized" sharpening with a one-pixel radius increases this number quite a bit, to an average of 1168 lw/ph. These numbers are on the low side, even for a 6-megapixel camera. (For example, the Nikon D50 showed an uncorrected resolution of 1426 lw/ph.) The K-100D appears to have a somewhat heavy-handed anti-aliasing filter and very conservative in-camera sharpening, making its images straight from the camera a little soft.............................................. .............................

Note: Whatmany of us suspect about the jpg issue....

Unfortunately your response will be typical as well........
RiceHigh wrote: [/b]

Quote:
Actually, Phil Askey is absolutely right in his *ist DS review regarding the poor JPEG quality. Your response (as well as the phenomenon you mentioned) are indeed typical examples of how *ist DS users will defend to death without looking at the fact. The fact is the compression of JPEG in the *ist Dx is very rough with loss of much picture details (of course this will decrease resolution, undoubtedly).

The K100D is not much more heavily sharpened as you suggested and I can tell that your assumption is wrong. Actually, I have illustrated clearly in the *ist DS Vs K100D JPEG shootout in my K100D full review:- Catbells wrote:
Quote:
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.
oreo57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2006, 8:00 PM   #56
Member
 
danag42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 69
Default

Would everyone in this thread just SHUT UP and go get a life?

Please?
danag42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 8:14 AM   #57
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 1,868
Default

danag42 wrote:
Quote:
Would everyone in this thread just SHUT UP and go get a life?

Please?
Why?? They are having fun, and you don't have to read what is written here.



Darren
Dal1970 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 11:03 AM   #58
Senior Member
 
oreo57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 152
Default

That's OK, helped me cypher how to do the color/font thing. Figure if they could do it so could I.
oreo57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 12:09 PM   #59
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Quote:
Why?? They are having fun, and you don't have to read what is written here.
I agree, the threads can always be avoided.
BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 2:14 PM   #60
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,974
Default

This is a forum which no one outright owns. It the TOS is violated then it should be reported to a moderator.

What anyone posts here within the TOS should be within their right to do so.

I read what RiceHigh has to say and I tend to agree on some points and not on others. The way he posts and what he posts seems to be a rub in the wrong way. Those who are aware of his style of posting should do the next best thing.

Don't read it.

I am not starting anything or trying to but will say that between my DS, KD100 and *N* camera I have to PP more often with my DS to get the image where I like to to be.


vIZnquest 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 10:51 AM.