Red Ring Tupperware Party, Clown Hunting (21)

Timphoto wrote in post #14161840
That's a pretty good quote, Dan.

Yes it is.

Woolburr wrote in post #14161815
The sad part is the fools that spend hours taking pictures of nothing to prove this camera or that camera is "bad". Go out and take some real world pictures and enjoy life.

The real problem is that the differance between all the cameras is so small that under normal usage, you're not going to see any difference at all. So the arguments fall into the fringes and the little differences. That's when they get silly.

Hi guys

Hi Harm.

Hi guys.

I still remember the iD Mark III kerfuffle. After years with mine, I've yet to experience a single focusing failure of the sort so many were complaining about. I'm not convince it wasn't largely a case of hysteria, but it sure ruined the rep of an otherwise fine camera.

AE focus is your friend.

Belmondo wrote in post #14161954
I still remember the iD Mark III kerfuffle. After years with mine, I've yet to experience a single focusing failure of the sort so many were complaining about. I'm not convince it wasn't largely a case of hysteria, but it sure ruined the rep of an otherwise fine camera..

The problem with all these issues is that they are real but will only affect a small group of people. They get posted on the web and all of a sudden you have hundreds of people trying to either show that the problem exists, or defending Canon trying to prove that those proving it exists are wrong. Those are the silly threads.

The focus problem was real, it affected NFL end zone cameramen.
The pattern noise problem is real. It affects a few people who shoot at low ISO in very high contrast situations and print huge.
Both problems can be seen when shooting in totally unrealistic conditions better known as silly land. The pattern noise issue is especially easy to bring out but no one in their right mind would ever take a picture like that.

Timphoto wrote in post #14161840
That's a pretty good quote, Dan.

Couldn't resist. So many of them border on that level of absurdity.

I have a couple of Topaz presets that can bring out pattern noise and banding on almost any image, from almost any camera, regardless of brand. If you try to push an image too far, it is going to bite back.

It would be a whole lot easier to take these asshats seriously if they had a masterpiece hanging at MOMA. Instead, all they have to show is overworked box shots on POTN.

Woolburr wrote in post #14162192
It would be a whole lot easier to take these asshats seriously if they had a masterpiece hanging at MOMA. Instead, all they have to show is overworked box shots on POTN.

Well everyone knows you will never be a legitimate photographer until you have an award winning box shot in your portfolio, so they just keep trying.

*sigh* wrote in post #14162246
Well everyone knows you will never be a legitimate photographer until you have an award winning box shot in your portfolio, so they just keep trying.

Can I become an award winning photographer, if I give myself an award?

Harm wrote in post #14162337
Can I become an award winning photographer, if I give myself an award?

We'll give you an award Harm.....just not for photography.

Woolburr wrote in post #14162343
We'll give you an award Harm.....just not for photography.

That won't stop him from self-identifying as an "Award-Winning" "Photographer" unless the award explicitly denies photographic abilities of the honorees . . . :{)#

Jon wrote in post #14162439
That won't stop him from self-identifying as an "Award-Winning" "Photographer" unless the award explicitly denies photographic abilities of the honorees . . . :{)#

I suspect he will do that regardless of the award. Perhaps we could name him POTN Non-Photographer of the year.