A6000 vs. A77ii Continuous AF - Very confused

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
123Mike
Senior MemberPosts: 4,245Gear list
Like?
Re: A6000 vs. A77ii Continuous AF - Very confused
In reply to VirtualMirage, 4 months ago

VirtualMirage wrote:

123Mike wrote:

We're both expressing opinions and facts.

Now we are, but my initial post wasn't. Opinions didn't start to slip in until you started to downplay the facts. Hence, reread the original post.

By you listing the differences, you were implying that the camera is superior. I pointed out that those differences aren't enough to consider it superior enough to warrant the cost. That is my opinion and that is my point of view.

The fact that people find the EVF good enough, is a fact.

No, it isn't. It is still an opinion. That is what you are missing. I could really care less about your opinion. I have an issue with you trying to pass opinion as fact.

You're misreading what I'm writing. I didn't say that the EVF is as good. I said that generally that people that tried the EVF, found it to be good enough. That people said that is a fact. Now, of course, not everyone will agree. But generally, looking around in tests and people talking about it, the ones that checked it out, generally found it to be good enough. I'm simply passing that observation on.

The SLTs have the same issue. What is shown in the EVF (or LCD) is interrupted while the exposure is taking place.

Wrong again. Just because you can't see anything on your display during the exposure doesn't mean the AF still isn't working. Since the AF sensor is a separate module that is constantly receiving light even during the exposure, the AF is not interrupted. On a camera wtih on sensor AF points, the AF is interrupted during the exposure process since no light is reaching the AF points. At this point either focus waits until the AF points receive light again or predictive AF algorithms take place and try to guess where the target will be.

You again are misreading what I said. Again, I said what is shown in the EVF or LCD is interrupted. I was not talking about the AF sensor.

I'm not contradicting anything. You're just trying distort things whenever you think that helps your argument.

It's kind of hard to distort it when in one comment above you said that it is tracking in real time at 11fps, which I followed up with that it is using predictive AF algorithms to do that while an exposure is taking place. You then claim that the predictive AF algorithm is my opinion and that the AF can see between shots. So you saying at first that focusing is real time and now that it is between shots is contradicting.

You're distorting things again. It was your opinion that the AF system of the A77ii is superior because of the AF sensor being able to see the scene uninterrupted. My opinion is that the A6000 can truly track the object at 11fps. You're implying that predictive algorithms is what is making it able to track at that speed. I think that although interpolating to move focus along in between where it can see the scene, that for at least 11 times per second it can refocus properly.

Why are you so threatened by opinions? I think you're trying to get others to have an opinion, controlled with how your are presenting facts. The fact that the opinions aren't working out the way you want, is upsetting you.

No, but clearly you are threatened by facts. Especially facts that may not agree with your personal opinions of said camera.

You keep on pretending that it is only about facts. You keep on pretending that everything you say is factual. It's not. You have opinions. I disagree with some of them.

It's you that is obsessed that 12 fps is more than 11 fps.

I beg to differ since it is you that keeps bringing it up and assuming I am trying to label one as better than the other. I never even mentioned that the higher frame rate makes it a superior camera. I only mentioned that it puts more of a demand on the hardware.

Not by enough to warrant for any decision making, in my opinion. You're free to disagree.

You are most certainly implying that one is better than the other. You even come up with stories about continuous uninterrupted focus input making anything less automatically inferior.

Ummm....no, I am not. I listed facts and let them speak for themselves. If you feel threatened that another camera specs higher than yours, then that is of your own deduction. But I never said one camera was better than the other.

Except, you are. You're implying that one is better by listing differences. You're also telling stories that might make one think that one's AF system is probably superior.

It is just a direct comparison to explain the reasons why the camera costs more.

Given what you can get for half the price these dasys, it seems to me the A77ii is overpriced. However, it is possible that the E-mount cameras are somewhat subsidized in the hopes of expensive E-mount lens sales.

Again, but that is an opinion. But it is finally an opinion that at least responds to why you think there is a cost difference between the two. Here, you are heading back on track.

Common assembly line stuff. Won't cost that much.

But it still costs money, does it not? More parts, more money, more to put together during manufacturing, more components that have individual mark ups.

Given that an entire A6000 is sold at $650, I find it hard to believe that building an A77ii costs 600 more. I think if it costed 1 grand, it'd be more in line. I suppose sold quantities makes the difference. Selling less means that more markup is required to make it financially viable. I could accept that.

It can be pennies to the dollar, but it still adds up and contributes to the overall cost.

That's what I think about you. You're trying to milk any little thing you can to nullify views that are different from your own.

You really have a skewed perception here. You really think I am trying to belittle one camera over the other or even belittle your opinions. You couldn't be further from the truth.

That's how you come across. Anything you say can and will be held against you. That's your attitude. I constantly have to be on the defense with you.

It really comes down to semantics. What I am posting you see as something different. I am posting non-biased facts (spec sheet level facts), you see me as trying to promote one camera over the other. What I see as corrections, you see as me trying to silence your opinions.

Stating that one camera does 12 fps and the other 11 fps are indeed facts. But you're expressing opinions yourself, while you're trying everything you can to make it not ok for me to add opinions.

You're expressing opinions about the cost. You're also expressing opinions about your assumption that one's focus system is better than the other.

So more buttons should cost less than fewer buttons?

That's kind of a straw man argument. You're changing the topic, and than attack that.
I never claimed that more buttons cost less. You're distorting things again. Very disingenuous.

A higher resolution EVF is cheaper than a lower resolution EVF?

What's with the distortions? I never said that.

A bigger body that requires more materials (magnesium at that) is cheaper than a smaller body that is mostly composite?

Tell me, are those really opinions?

It is my opinion that the differences don't warrant the extra cost, for my purposes, and possibly for some other people's purposes. Those are the types of views that I've been adding. You keep on trying to make that go away, by pretending that everything is only about listing the differences, which clearly it is not.

As for the assumption that one focus system is better than the other, you are seeing things. I didn't say one was better than the other. I did, however, mention factual limitations of one focusing system over another. But I never mentioned how one performs compared to the other.

Both have their limitations. One can see the scene uninterrupted. The other can see more of the scene. Which one in the end performs better is not known. But the reports of how well the A6000 does it, are quite positive.

Trust me, you're being negative right from the start.

I'd really like to know how I was being negative from the start. Give me some examples. This ought to be good.

If any negativity has been mentioned it has been towards your lack of actually listening and comprehending what is being said and what the post was actually about. But that didn't occur until some posts in. But as for your opinions or towards the cameras, there hasn't been any negativity.

Plus you're trying to downplay what I have to say. And you're adding opinions. Claiming you're only about facts, which is false.

Seriously, what am I downplaying? I really want to know since you haven't come up with a single good example that shows that I have downplayed you. Meanwhile, I have come up with several where you did such a thing to me.

You have been trying to make it seem that my opinions are irrelevant.

In your eyes, people should not be saying things like camera X is a competent camera? You'd be having very boring conversations then, because it must only be about what can not be denied by anyone. Oh but wait, you *are* allowed to insert and imply opinions, but you have a problem when others do that. Right. And that's reasonable?

Wrong again, very wrong.

People can claim all they want how competent a camera is but it doesn't make it fact, it only makes it an opinion. And people are entitled to their opinions, but it still doesn't make it a fact.

You keep on being obsessed with facts. At what point did I even claim these opinions as being facts? Why do you have a problem with opinions? For instance, you point out that 12 fps is higher than 11 fps. Then I point out that it isn't enough of a difference to warrant a decision. Then you insist that we keep to facts. It isn't how conversations work. You're not being reasonable.

What I offered was material where people can take it in and come up with their own opinions. I didn't insert my opinion in my original post to sway someone one way or another.

So, I expressed my opinions, and you've been hammering all over it.

You, on the other hand, voiced your opinion against fact trying to counter it in favor of just one camera. You then take offense at anything outside of your opinion.

I was expressing my point of view. I take offence in you making it seem that my opinions are irrelevant.

And to go further, you expanded the opinion from being just your opinion to being the "people's" opinion, aka the majority or everyone. That doesn't sound reasonable to me.

It has been my observation that when I've seen people express their opinion about that EVF, that it is almost all been positive, despite an initial apprehension that some of its specs are lower. I've also seen opinions that the colors looked more accurate than what they have been used to. So, that means that if someone states that the A77ii has a higher spec'ed EVF, and that given the general consensus appear to be that the A6000's EVF is pretty good too, that the EVF spec should contribute to a decision. All that is my view and my opinion. I think I'm being perfectly reasonable.

So from now on, you won't express any more opinions then? Only state facts. That also means you can not comment on if someone's picture is a nice picture, because after all, those can not be facts.

No, and that is also where you fail to understand and use a terrible example at that.

It's one thing to give your opinion when asked for, it is also one thing to give a opinion and label it as such.

I don't need your permission to express my opinions thank you very much. A little bossy are we?

But when you try to dispute facts with opinions (especially ones that hold no ground) or give opinions and label them as facts is when you are in the wrong. That is what I am getting at here.

Expressing opinions how a difference does not warrant contributing enough to make the overall package superior, also given that some of the differences go the other way, is not disputing facts.

You tried to dispute facts with your opinions, and that is why I decided to step in.

Not dispute. Putting it in perspective is what I've been doing. Anyway, you're not some sort of overlord ruler here. You have no more rights than I do here.

You then claim my facts are not facts but instead are opinions

No. You're implying and you are adding opinions, when you're pretending you're not.

followed up with claiming I am trying to silence your opinions because I don't like what you have to say because you are in Camp A.

You're trying to make my opinions seems irrelevant.

You claim I am in Camp B, but really you don't know that since I never promoted one camera over the other.

I disagree.

You're not being reasonable is what. This is not how normal conversation work. You're being absolutely anal about things here. Trying police what one can and can not say. Ridiculous.

Do you really think you are being reasonable?

Yes.

You keep digging yourself into a deeper hole, failing to understand why I am even having this conversation with you. Do you even know why I keep responding to you? Do you even know what initiated it?

You have a big ego and you can't handle not getting the last word?

If you think it is because I don't like your opinion or that I am trying to silence you or trying to sway someone to a different camera, you are dead wrong. It has nothing to do with any of those.

When you decided to pick a fight, it became that, yes.

I am not saying you are wrong to think how awesome the A6000 is nor am I saying how much much better the A77II is.

When I do, you're pointing out how it is not a fact. So, every time there is an opinion, you're going to try to get others to conform to only expressing facts then.

Again, you responded to a factoid post with opinions that try to downplay and/or refute the specs and are upset that I responded back to you correcting you of such.

Again, no. I responded with my view as to why some of those differences does not warrant a decision to consider one better as a whole offering. Of course, that is my opinion, and others can disagree, that's fine.

As said before, if you responded in your own post listing your opinions as a stand alone, to someone elses opinions, or directly to the OP it wouldn't be a problem.

Ultimately, you having a "problem" with any of this, is entirely your problem. I don't have to run things by you to express my opinion.

And not because they are opinions and they don't belong in my post, but because their wording and implication has more meaning standing on their own.

But instead you responded to facts and based your opinions against them to refute the viability. On top of that, they were opinions that had nothing to do with the topic.

I've explained this. This is what happens in a conversation. One thing leads to another. It is what happens in conversations. There is no rule that dictates that everyone must 100% confirm to the OP's question. Things are often asked for a reason. One can anticipate what those reasons are. This sparks a thought, and a reaction. Expressing those reactions is what happens in conversations. It's normal people kind of stuff.

To go even further, instead of giving a summarization of your opinion at the bottom, you felt that you needed to itemize each piece with its own opinion. When you did this, your opinions changed from an OP ED piece that sings your praises to counterpoint post with weak arguments and not much backing to lean against.

That's what you did not like. Opinions that made it seem that the differences weren't as great as you want them to be perceived as.

Same words, different posts, different interpretations.

Different people different interpretations. I think you need to learn to tolerate other people's opinions better.

You're pretending that you're talking about facts. But you're implying opinions, by making it seem that the cost of buttons is substantial. I think it's not. We simply have a difference of opinion in that regard.

But I was talking about facts, clear as day.

And I was expressing opinions about those facts. Why on earth do you have such a huge problem with that?

I never said the buttons were substantial in cost. They are just one of many other features and components that add to the cost. Nothing more, nothing less.

And in my opinion, the amount of cost is probably not a big difference. Nothing more, nothing less.

Yes, let's let others decide who is being reasonable. I'm not worried.

Well, judging by the likes on the posts, it appears more people are in agreement with me than you. But that isn't about camera opinions, which for some reason is what you think this is about.

Yes, you have friends here. It is making you very confident. I don't care. I don't need any "likes" to feel secure in my position.

Those are your assumptions and opinions, not facts.

No, I'm pretty sure they are facts.

You're distorting things and are taking things out of context.

Fact: the A6000's AF points can't focus on anything when the shutter is in the way. Fact: The A77II's dedicated AF sensor can focus while the shutter is in the way of the sensor. Pretty simple, actually.

True. But that does not mean that the effective focusing of the A77ii is better. Yet that *is* an assumption that others are going to deduce from it.
Another fact is that the A6000 has many more AF points allowing it to see a more complete scene. If that increases the chances of getting an object in focus, in my opinion, yes it would.

We disagree.

Clearly we do since you think I don't value opinions. On that same note I can say that you are coming across as not valuing facts.

I have opinions are those facts. That does not imply me claiming that those facts aren't factual. Again, my point of view is, what differences warrant to judge one camera being a better overall package. This means different things to different people, and different uses and wants, will result in different decisions.

You're making your share of assumptions. This comes off as truthful claims. Claims how one is better because of something that you see working different from the other.

Go on, list my share of assumptions that hasn't already been stated as such. List what I am trying to pass off as truthful claims.

You can pretend that you're only about the facts all you want. You're implying opinions when you're doing that. You're certainly implying opinion the way you have been responding to my opinions.

Again, I never said one camera is better than the other. They are different horses for different courses, which has been mentioned ad nauseam.

And I have been expressing opinions as I saw fit. What's the problem?

And I am correcting you. You're claiming you're only stating facts. You're stating opinions and you're making assumptions as well.

Again, list where I am wrong.

You've been negative to moment that you started this argument.

Proof?

When I express my opinions, you have been trying to make those opinions going away by insisting that I must stick with merely acknowledging the differences. What I wanted to do is to provide my point of view. The way you are going about this, are attempts to make my opinions seem irrelevant.

I have. You seemed to have a problem with that.

Nope, I don't. You don't see me responding to your other posts, do you?

What facts have I denied?

How the AF works, the EVF, the flash, the buttons. Care for me to go on?

I have not denied anything about the AF, EVF, Flash, or the buttons! You're again distorting things. Taking things out of context. You are being very disingenuous! What I did is express opinions. This is perfectly reasonable. When people see a list of difference, they're going to form their own opinions about that. I felt I wanted to add my point of view offering a perspective. That is not denying facts, that is weighing things off and expressing opinions.

There it is again. "but but but, op this and op that, and dare you veer off course". It's about A77ii vs A6000 stuff. Cost difference. What justifies it. Does it imply that one is automatically so much better because of the higher cost? Pointing out that the lower cost one is by no means inferior, is just fine, and you can not forbid that. You simply do not have that kind of control.

You clearly have an issue with actually answering the OP's original question. Why do you feel that you cannot answer what the thread was originally about and must feel to post whatever you feel like that barely has any relation to the topic?

I've explained this. I wanted to offer my point of view. You did not like that. So you decided to pick a fight.

You don't jump into a car thread talking about engines and make a post talking about computers. It's off topic. Which is now what this has digressed to.

Again, very disingenuous. Distorting things again. I have explained that in a conversation, with opinions, one thing leads to another. You seem to think that you're going to play mr. policeman and force me to conform to your rules. Not going to work.

And my point of view is very straightforward. I openly share my views, my opinions, and my findings. It is what we do here. You don't like that. Well that's too bad.

Again, they are welcome. But don't get offended when you are wrong and someone decides to respond pointing it out.

Then when I express an opinion that you disagree with, simply point it out in a normal fashion. Don't sit there and minimize opinions by insisting that everything must remain confined to the list of differences. People are going to get opinions from seeing lists of differences. So am I. I'm expressing them. So?

We'll let others decide who's the one needing growing up. People probably think we're both nuts at this point.

At this point probably so. So far it seems from other responses, people are in agreement with me. But here I am continuing to "feed the troll", so to speak.

Again, I'm not going to draw any conclusions with anyone siding with anyone here. Ultimately, we're in a highly opinionated forum, and I've spoken in favor of a product that is not the product that people want in this forum. So, people's reactions are going to be tad biased, which is to be expected. I don't need any "likes" to be confident about my position.

Your stories about continuous auto focus were quite telling.

Again, that is what you took away from the facts. Don't feel threatened by it. It is what it is and is a limitation in the design.

You win some, you lose some. Either system in this case have limitations that the other does not. The point is that when it is pointed out that one system has continuous view of a scene, that is going to result in people forming opinions and expectations. I'm pointing out that that does not necessarily accurate. I'm also pointing out opposing limitations. Plus observations that other made that the AF system is quite effective. I didn't want people think that AF at 11fps is not possible. You implied that it is merely prediction algorithms that makes it work. Interpolations I can see. But I think it tracks at 11fps full time. At least, that's how I'm interpreting what I've seen demonstrated, and the casual testing I've done myself.

Luckily, it seems to have a good enough predictive AF algorithm that it may handle most situations just fine.

That's your assumption, your opinion. You're assuming that it's about predictions that can kind of fudging things, making it seem alright. Or at least, that's what you're implying what you say this.

And that's what happens. Things come up. Not something for you to forbid.

I didn't forbid it.

You have a serious problem with the opinions that I have been expressing. That is very clear.

Op this and op that. I guess everything should be a questionair on forums like this. Rule A number one: though shall not discuss any other matters than precisely what the op talks about. Well, the op didn't set any rules. The op expressed what justified the cost difference. And that leads to analyzing all the things that people can think of. I contributed my bit. You had a problem with that.

Again with this fear to actually respond to the OP's original question. So why are you in this thread again?

To express my opinions and my point of view. Also to share my excitement, and my findings. It is meant as a positive thing.

That's how I see you.

You see me as superior, how kind.

I definitely do not see you as superior.

Joking aside, it is you that took the post as thinking it was superiority match. I have mentioned numerous times this isn't a competition and I am not mentioning what camera is better than the other.

You have been implying opinions using lists of differences. It are those implied opinions that I'm reacting to.

What facts have I denied?

How the AF works, the EVF, the flash, the buttons. Care for me to go on?

I have not denied anything about the AF, EVF, Flash, or the buttons. Instead of me copy-pasting the same response again, scroll back a few paragraphs. I covered this.

You're trying to make my opinions seems incorrect and unimportant by trying to change the subject to other facts.

No. I am clarifying that your opinions are opinions and that they do not change the facts.

It is my opinion that some of those facts do not warrant the product to be considered superior enough to warrant a decision. A decision by the OP perhaps. It is also my opinion that some of those facts do not contribute to cost as much as what it's made out to be.

You're distorting things again. I was sharing my excitement how I prefer to maximize on utilizing natural lighting, by using a bright lens on top of a focal reducer. I've gotten nice results with that, and perhaps others might find that useful. So, I can live with a smaller flash, because in my case I'm not using it much, if at all. When others get frustrated that the flash is too weak, then they could also consider using the tricks I have. Or not. That's ok.

Regardless, it still doesn't change the fact that it has a weaker flash. That was the plain and simple comparison I was getting at.

I did not deny that. In fact I acknowledged that. I offered information what I tend to do in low light. I thought it was creative to present that. You didn't want to hear it, however. You insisted that it must remain merely about that one list. That's not very creative I find.

I say higher resolution EVF, you say you are happy with yours.

No. I said that I have not seen people having used or evaluated the EVF, complain about it being not good enough. So you're distorting, misquoting things, again.

So you are not happy with your EVF?

You're misreading again. I said that when I hear people speak about the EVF of the A6000, they express that although they initially were worried, they were surprised how good enough it really is.

You also said the EVF on the A6000 is just fine, I assumed that meant you are happy with it and that a higher resolution EVF gives no advantage.

Myself and others that have it or have tried it, apparently.

I didn't quite say they're not needed. I said that there are plenty of buttons on the A6000, plus that it has a customizable menu on top of the customizable buttons.

To say the A6000 has plenty of buttons, would that not imply that you feel the extra buttons on the A77II are not needed then?

I think the number of buttons is enough to make things work efficient on the A6000. That's my opinion.

Again, my post was in regards to what adds to the cost, not what makes the camera better.

One thing leads to another. It is what happens when people express their opinions.

"So my opinions need correcting? Opinions about button quantities and using bright lenses and avoiding flash? Because you have different opinions."

I simply explained that I don't like using flash in the first place, and that I maximize on the low light abilities by using a bright lens and a focal reducer. I think that is a creative solution. Sure it doesn't always work and it isn't for everyone.

Your opinions didn't contribute to why one camera costs more to the other, instead you took my bullet points of items that may contribute to increased costs and questioned the need for such items and that many of them you felt you didn't need.

So what? It isn't a rule that everything must be about just that list. In your view, the only reasonable response would be a series of yeses. This isn't North Korea you know.

I though my solution was constructive. You didn't like it. The flash is weak, fine. So?

It would have been constructive if someone was asking for reasons to not use a flash. But it offered nothing to explain the cost difference between the two flashes.

It's not for you to decide what opinions I come up with. You don't set the rules. I don't need your permission to talk.

Sure it had place in the conversation! Flash is used to make photography in darker situation possible, among other reasons. There are other ways to do that, which are also appealing. Sure, it doesn't solve every need, but it *IS* a solution in some cases. I'm free to offer these options, and there isn't a darn thing you can do about that.

Know what that is called? It is called going off on a tangent. You claim relevance because of one very loose link that can tie everything together. In this case, flash. Yet, your response holds no place nor contributes to the original question or to my response, which was about cost.

No, it is me telling what comes to my mind. It is you that started this fight. That makes you the one that is going off on a tangent.

And I disagree with not contributing. The reason why people ask questions, is because people want to form an opinion what something is all about. So, I'm contributing information that can help with that. Sharing one's views and opinions is what people do.

I've talked about that a number of times now, right in this very message. Scroll up.

Actually, you didn't. You mentioned once or twice about the AF which wasn't an opinion but fact. You don't mention much else.

It's difficult to deduce what you're referring to. *What* about the AF. Is it not already clear?

That particular issue, it doesn't affect me, and probably not most others either. And I've explained why.

Again, that is your opinion but still doesn't explain why it may or may not cost more. And while it doesn't affect you, it can affect others and may be a factor in their purchase. But that wasn't the point of this conversation.

Many things contribute to a buying decision. Perhaps my views contribute to that too. Who knows.

The auto focus mechanism comes to mind.

I stated the differences, I didn't claim it was superior. Again, that was your take away.

You left the impression that because it has a certain advantage that it is probably better. I dispute that deduction. I have as of yet to see anyone complain that the A6000's AF system is stumbling all over itself. It seems it's working very well. And if it is working very well, and not merely fudged by predictive algorithms, which you also implied, then suddenly all those advantages of that pdaf system being able to see the scene uninterrupted, becomes irrelevant. I don't *know* if that is truly the case, but, it is not reasonable to assume that the A77ii must be better, and that *IS* what you have implying.

Stories about auto focusing for one. How having more buttons is much better. How it's important to have a faster shutter speed. It's all over.

No, most of those were in response to your comments and not ones I laid out in the original post.

I never said that it was part of your starting list.

And some of those you were even asking a question to their relevance, which I then gave you an answer. So really, you asked for it so I gave it to you.

I didn't get a chance to ask anything. You've forced me to be on the defense the whole time. That's how manipulative you've been here.

Scroll up, rinse and repeat.

And again, you failed to provide any significant proof. As I mentioned before my original post were based on facts with one publicly labeled assumption. Any opinions mentioned afterwards were in response to some of your questions as well as your opinions. But none of those opinions were directly favoring one camera over another.

I thought you were suppose to be all about just facts. So it's ok for you to have opinions, but it's not ok for me to have opinions.

What you consider proper, might be seen as un-creative by others (it is by me).

Read above as to what I mean by this.

I'm not seeing a very creative position here. Sorry.

You're trying to prevent someone arguing why a given fact is not important enough to make a enough of a difference to make it a deciding factor. So, you're trying to control the conversation, again, through restrictions and made up rules, your standards.

No, I am trying to correct someone who is using a cost comparison post as a sounding board to reflect their personal opinions in favor of only one camera all the while having none of those opinions relate to the original topic of explaining the cost difference between the two.

You're pretending like you're some sort of police force, that insists that people conform to your line of thinking. You're not tolerating opinions that can reach out to what started the question in the first place.

You're not tolerating opinions that you do not like, that much is clear.

You are not tolerating facts nor know how to stay on topic, that is my issue. As mentioned before over and over, I have no issue with opinions.

I haven't denied any facts. You simply don't like it when the response isn't a series of yeses, and that instead they're opinions that show a perspective that you don't like.

That's your opinion and your view. You have your interests. You think your view is more valid?

Actually, yeah...I do. My original post stayed on topic.

That just acknowledges your arrogance then.

I don't think I'm off topic at all. This argument I'm having with your is off topic, but that's an argument that you started, not me.

I think what you need to learn is that other people have other ways of looking at things. Instead of trying to control things by forcing things, let people be what they are. If someone offers a creative solution, don't downplay that, just because you insist that the other must simply acknowledge a fact.

Actually, you started it with your off topic opinions. You then continued this conversation to run further off topic by arguing against it and failing to see what the original problem was about, which then you someone misconstrued into thinking we are trying to see which camera is better (which it has nothing to do with it).

I am all for letting people be who they are. There is a place for creative solutions, but my post wasn't that place. It wasn't a post about the limitations of a camera, only a cost comparison between the two. You, somehow, decided that was a perfect post to offer "solutions", "good enoughs", and "not needed" ideas.

The whole point of how this went off the rails is you went way off the tangent. This conversation would have been real short if you responded with something like:

"Yeah, sorry about that. You are right those can add to the cost of the camera. My opinions are not refuting that. I was just offering my opinion of the camera based on my personal experience. It doesn't have much relevance to the topic at hand, but I felt the maybe the OP would like to know from a user's perspective on how well the camera works."

But instead, you dug your heels in and decided to run with it regardless of how far off base your were.

That is pretty much it in a nutshell, practically my only issue with this whole conversation. It had nothing to do with your views on the camera or opinions in general. You just listed off your opinions in the wrong topic.

You're trying to rationalize how it must be reasonable for my opinions to be inappropriate. And that's not how the world works. People all have their own thoughts and reactions. We're all free thinkers. None of us have to comply with what works specifically in your world.

 123Mike's gear list:123Mike's gear list
Sony a6000 Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS A3000 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
f/8New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow