Post the most ridiculous comments you've received with a big lens on!

20droger wrote in post #11540861
But then, one could argue that people whose choose not to learn about cameras, but insist upon using them, are not all that smart.

I feel much the same way about people (family members in particular) and computers.

Tracon wrote in post #11535172
Of course the most ridiculous comment I've received with a white lens on my camera was "I bet that takes good pictures!"

Did you bite your tongue or give a really good sarcastic reply? I would have a hard time not saying something back.

..."Yes, it does!"...

". . . only if I let it . . . "

gkuenning wrote in post #11540132
Returning to the topic at hand, holding a camera at arm's length and using the flash isn't stupidity, it's ignorance. .

I must be ignorant, although I thinkt this was just stupidity. I did that yesterday trying to get a better shot with my wide angle, shooting from the hip with a flash attached is not a good idea since the flash ends up right infront of your face. Yes I hit the shutter button, burned that image on to my retina.

Jon wrote in post #11541358
". . . only if I let it . . . "

Heh! True, sometimes my carelessness gets in the way of letting my camera do its job!

lensmen wrote in post #11538009
.... and you missed their almost perfect pick up line. Dohhhh....

I had actually taken some pics of them later during the day, and often see them at the race track when I am shooting.....they are nice girls! Their father races with my uncles, so again, I see them from time to time....

SO next time don't miss the opportunity :P

Tracon wrote in post #11535172
Of course the most ridiculous comment I've received with a white lens on my camera was "I bet that takes good pictures!"

Surely the simple answer to that, if you are any good, is yes?

it would only be a ridiculous comment if the lens was in the hands of someone who did not know how to use it or the camera it was attached to.

neil_r wrote in post #11547219
Surely the simple answer to that, if you are any good, is yes?

it would only be a ridiculous comment if the lens was in the hands of someone who did not know how to use it or the camera it was attached to.

Actually, the "that camera takes good pictures" comment is not so much ridiculous as it is insulting. It implies that it's the camera and not the person that is responsible for the quality of the pictures.

Yes, a high quality camera can take good pictures, but I think the photographer may have just a bit to do with it. Just like a Formula One car can win races, but the driver may just play a part.

I was at an outlet mall here in South West Florida just taking some family shots of my wife and child. MY 7D and my 28-135 (not a big lens I know) in hand and a security guard approached me and conversation goes
Security guard -"you can not take pictures here"
Me - "why:
Security Guard - "it's private property and we do not allow cameras on property"
Me - "ok no problem, but do you instruct every teen aged girl with a camera to put it away"
Security Guard - "no only people with the big ones"
WOW I guess it's private property and I can not argue but it sounds like discrimination to me. Kind of made me chuckle to be honest.

7D_Sniper wrote in post #11547721
I was at an outlet mall here in South West Florida just taking some family shots of my wife and child. MY 7D and my 28-135 (not a big lens I know) in hand and a security guard approached me and conversation goes
Security guard -"you can not take pictures here"
Me - "why:
Security Guard - "it's private property and we do not allow cameras on property"
Me - "ok no problem, but do you instruct every teen aged girl with a camera to put it away"
Security Guard - "no only people with the big ones"
WOW I guess it's private property and I can not argue but it sounds like discrimination to me. Kind of made me chuckle to be honest.

If you're in the US, sue you can sue for everything - maybe we get to have a laugh out of it?

DetlevCM wrote in post #11547733
If you're in the US, sue you can sue for everything - maybe we get to have a laugh out of it?

Nah in the US private property is taken very seriously, I know we are lawyer happy but private property is still held to a high standard in the US.

7D_Sniper wrote in post #11547752
Nah in the US private property is taken very seriously, I know we are lawyer happy but private property is still held to a high standard in the US.

True but I doubt that the mall management would approve of the type of selective enforcement shown there.....

Wayne

7D_Sniper wrote in post #11547752
Nah in the US private property is taken very seriously, I know we are lawyer happy but private property is still held to a high standard in the US.

But as you mentioned - discrimination.

-> In the UK from what I've read you cannot technically ban photography, but if you say you do now want it and somebody does they are trespassing -> and that's their offence.

I have no idea how exactly it works in the US - but as you mentioned, discrimination.
Why can't you shoot with a larger camera when small ones are allowed? -> It's not so much the anti photography rule that I find suspect but more the "camera size rule".

An what's a big camera anyway? - That definition is rather shaky too in my eyes.