I got precisely what you wanted to say: pointless trolling to stir up controversy. If you're going to troll, please stay off the forums.
--
----------------
http://www.pbase.com/tmalcom/
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
This forum suffers from a real plaque: Fanboyism!
- Thread starter Lupti
- Start date
--
----------------
http://www.pbase.com/tmalcom/
That may all be true. I don't know one way or another. However...
...look at what you write above. You call people who buy Canon and Nikon feel "superior" and are "lemmings". Just what kind of comment is that?
In fact, I note their is a lot of anti-Canon sentiment. When Nikon made their D3, then the 4/3 crowd starts considering 35mm FF and giving it a fair shake. Nevermind that the 5D has been around almost 3 years and actually has higher IQ at base ISO than the D3 and only slightly worse at higher ISOs.
It's like 4/3 shooters are primarily anti-Canon, and only rally to Nikon since Nikon competes with Canon.
Oh how you've gotten that wrong! Once again, let me cite this thread as evidence:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=27770062
The differences between formats is clearly explained, with a diagram, and not one single derogatory remark against smaller sensor systems. But look at the responses from the 4/3 fancrowd. Not only does ignorance abound, but not one single image is posted.
That's exactly what I'm talking about. Ignorant people shooting off their mouths with no understanding or evidence of any sort to back up their claims.
No -- you in the Oly DSLR forum have the same problem of being defensive when you are not being attacked. Again, for example, in the thread linked above, it was clearly demonstrated why f/4 on 35mm FF puts the same total amount of light on the sensor as f/2 on 4/3. Yet people say "f/2 = f/2" regardless of format and have not the slightest understanding of what an f-ratio really measures (the f-ratio measures the intensity of the light, not the total amount of light). They have no concept that the quality of an image is determined by the total amount of light, not the intensity of the light. They do not understand, as is also clearly explained in the initial post in the thread, that it is the pixel density, not the crop factor, that determines the effective reach of a system.
That thread is the strongest evidence of "fanboyism" that I can offer you. A person comes in to demonstrate the differences between systems, without making any disapraging remarks, and is attacked by a bunch of ignorant people because he demonstrates the simple fact that 35mm FF gathers two stops more light (and has two stops more shallow DOF) than 4/3 for the same f-ratio. But, by the same token, he acknowledges that while this fact is an advantage for some, it is not an advantage for all. Let me quote the first sentence of the concluding paragraph:
"Is this [the greater light collecting ability of 35mm FF lenses] of any practical benefit? Well, that depends on what you shoot. As I said in the other thread, 'If you don't need the speed, then the smaller format can often be a good choice.'"
I mean, is there anything disparaging of 4/3 in that line? Who chooses 4/3 when they need a system that collects a lot of light? And for those that don't need to collect that kind of light, then isn't 4/3 a good choice? I mean, isn't that kind of "duh"?
But instead of people saying, "Oh, I get it. However, for my shooting, I don't need that kind of light collecting ability or shallow DOF, and the greater pixel density of 4/3 with it's smaller high quality lenses is a much better system for me", which no one disagrees with, they spout out ignorant fanboy drivel.
--
--joe
http://www.josephjamesphotography.com
http://www.pbase.com/joemama/
Actually I think YOU are the troll. I haven´t seen yet postings from you about cameras but in the Mac forum...
--
You made a picture...fine!
"It´s the photographer, not the camera."
Oh really? I always read postings like this when someone asks to upgrade his 350D to a 40D. Then someone posts sport pics with the 350D to prove that 6fps aren´t necessary. Maybe - but with 6fps it´s much more easy! I think this people are envious.
"Invest your money in good glass rather than in an expensive body".
Oh really? Ok, someone buys an - let´s say - cheap 400D, buys some L lenses but can´t reach the full potencial of them because AF is too slow, handling is bad etc.
I also don´t see a reason to buy a bunch of primes in times of good high ISO performance and PP. Also good zooms are equal in performance. I sold my 50mm lens because I rarely had used it, I preferred the 18-200mm on Nikon.
"Who needs fast AF, high ISO performance, much fps? 30 years ago it was possible to get good results with MF, ISO100 film and no motor winder."
Blabla! We live nowadays and not 30 years ago. Sure it was possible to get nice pics with skill and primitive equipment. So what? Why make things more difficult as they are?
--
You made a picture...fine!
Oh really? I always read postings like this when someone asks to upgrade his 350D to a 40D. Then someone posts sport pics with the 350D to prove that 6fps aren´t necessary. Maybe - but with 6fps it´s much more easy! I think this people are envious.
"Invest your money in good glass rather than in an expensive body".
Oh really? Ok, someone buys an - let´s say - cheap 400D, buys some L lenses but can´t reach the full potencial of them because AF is too slow, handling is bad etc.
I also don´t see a reason to buy a bunch of primes in times of good high ISO performance and PP. Also good zooms are equal in performance. I sold my 50mm lens because I rarely had used it, I preferred the 18-200mm on Nikon.
"Who needs fast AF, high ISO performance, much fps? 30 years ago it was possible to get good results with MF, ISO100 film and no motor winder."
Blabla! We live nowadays and not 30 years ago. Sure it was possible to get nice pics with skill and primitive equipment. So what? Why make things more difficult as they are?
--
You made a picture...fine!
N
neil holmes
Guest
Only 6fps huh?
Well then why disparage the Casio...that gives a much faster frame rate...oh there are other things than fps!
If someone does not have the money for both pro camera and pro lens this is as valid as any other way. Some people might want to have the latest greatest camera with a soda bottle for a lens...more power to them...others would be able to get just as good photos with the "L" glass and an entry camera as with a pro camera and off course they can always get the pro camera later when it will be a better version.
Good for you....others disagree...and there is no rule that says you can not use a prime with good high iso performance and shoot in even lower light still..
Actually, I do not NEED fast af or more than 3fps. Most of my lenses are manual focus and I shoot a lot in low light at speeds where NOBODY can shoot that fast even if the camera has it. A faster shutter speed might be nice from time to time...but it is not somthing I am going to go out and pay for.
this is a HOBBY for me. Some people LIKE to not have the newest thing for everything...thats is half the fun......I do not NEED any more lenses either but it will not stop me buying old ones that might be fun or have there use.
Just why DO you use a camera....so you can say it was made at 6fps?...or because you saw something you wanted to shoot?
neil
john farrar
Veteran Member
Of course it doesn't matter that loads of other things will be better with regards to image quality, the important little things like contrast and flare handling and edge-to-edge consistency. Landscape photographers couldn't give two about slow AF, and good photographers long ago discovered the uses of manual focus.
--
John.
graham the red
Forum Enthusiast
dholl
Senior Member
- Messages
- 3,239
- Reaction score
- 493
I think it's lazy, defeatist and immature to always call people trolls rather than engage in the debate. Just ignore the debate if you can't input anything relevant.
Me, I got the Olympus E-410 because it was the absolutely cheapest option for me to get into DSLR. I am now massively happy because the performance, IQ, features and old-lens possibilities are all much to my satisfaction.
Sure, I really wanted the 40D + a macro lens...but who was going to buy that for me?
It's limiting to be a fanboy of technological gear (tho' it makes sense when it involves food & beverages). I'll always be open to upgrade to whatever suits me best but I certainly am a fan of my current, all-Olympus, gear.
--
dholl
Me, I got the Olympus E-410 because it was the absolutely cheapest option for me to get into DSLR. I am now massively happy because the performance, IQ, features and old-lens possibilities are all much to my satisfaction.
Sure, I really wanted the 40D + a macro lens...but who was going to buy that for me?
It's limiting to be a fanboy of technological gear (tho' it makes sense when it involves food & beverages). I'll always be open to upgrade to whatever suits me best but I certainly am a fan of my current, all-Olympus, gear.
--
dholl
The thing is that some people are simply ignorant and honestly have nothing to contribute to a debate. But they enjoy calling others "trolls".
Case in point -- take a look at this idiot:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=27792259
He asks people "not to feed the trolls", but look who's been doing the feeding in that thread. He's the biggest troll there! He's merely asked to provide evidence to support his claims:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=27792196
but as he doesn't have any, all he can do is frantically writhe about and call those that call him on his BS "trolls".
There you go!
You have that same problem, eh? : )
It's good to understand the plusses and minuses between systems. But to get that understanding in terms of IQ, you have to see pics so you can really know what the differences are. Fact is, you can get great pics with any modern system, including compacts. So when a person touts one system as "better" than another, they have to be very specific, because no system is "better" in every way.
--
--joe
http://www.josephjamesphotography.com
http://www.pbase.com/joemama/
rsn48
Veteran Member
I think that maturity is what is needed when participating here on the dpreview forums; flogging one's one personal favourites [okay, cue the marching band with the banner saying "Canon" on it] is immature. When we have boyish behavior pushing a product [bring in the cheerleaders chanting "Canon"] over another product, we really reduce the quality of the forums here. [start the hymn - "Amazing Canon, how sweet the sound, that saved a wretch like me.....]
I feel much better for having said that and I expect much better behaviour from everyone here from now on. [okay, one side of the stadium say "Can" and the other side say "Non", start the chant... Can..... Non....Can....Non - where's Crazy George when you need him]
--
Either you are in charge of the camera, or it is in charge of you.
I feel much better for having said that and I expect much better behaviour from everyone here from now on. [okay, one side of the stadium say "Can" and the other side say "Non", start the chant... Can..... Non....Can....Non - where's Crazy George when you need him]
--
Either you are in charge of the camera, or it is in charge of you.
.... since this isn't a photography website. It's a camera gear website.
You really don't see much of this behavior on websites that focus on picture taking (like photonotes.com and fredmiranda.com) and not camera brands.
This whole website is driven by equipment reviews. Hence the name, Dpreview.
And there is something in human nature that makes people want to compete for having the "best themselves" while other people's stuff is labeled "inferior." My wife even tells me there are "fanboys" on her gardening website. People who will tell you that one particular rose is the best!
If you think its bad here, you should visit some of the political forums!
--
Marty
http://flickr.com/photos/7735239@N02/
Panasonic FZ7, FZ20, FZ30, LX2
You really don't see much of this behavior on websites that focus on picture taking (like photonotes.com and fredmiranda.com) and not camera brands.
This whole website is driven by equipment reviews. Hence the name, Dpreview.
And there is something in human nature that makes people want to compete for having the "best themselves" while other people's stuff is labeled "inferior." My wife even tells me there are "fanboys" on her gardening website. People who will tell you that one particular rose is the best!
If you think its bad here, you should visit some of the political forums!
--
Marty
http://flickr.com/photos/7735239@N02/
Panasonic FZ7, FZ20, FZ30, LX2
dholl
Senior Member
- Messages
- 3,239
- Reaction score
- 493
too true...the only other gear forums i've frequented have been music production gear...there it can get very snobby.
dholl
--.... since this isn't a photography website. It's a camera gear website.
You really don't see much of this behavior on websites that focus on
picture taking (like photonotes.com and fredmiranda.com) and not
camera brands.
This whole website is driven by equipment reviews. Hence the name,
Dpreview.
And there is something in human nature that makes people want to
compete for having the "best themselves" while other people's stuff
is labeled "inferior." My wife even tells me there are "fanboys" on
her gardening website. People who will tell you that one particular
rose is the best!
If you think its bad here, you should visit some of the political
forums!
--
Marty
http://flickr.com/photos/7735239@N02/
Panasonic FZ7, FZ20, FZ30, LX2
dholl
chrishurley
Senior Member
Unless he really prefers a Guild...
sorry. couldn't resist. Its the same thing with all gear.
Why do you have 4 cameras?
Think about it, enough said.
--
Best regards,
Doug
http://pbase.com/dougj
Think about it, enough said.
--
Best regards,
Doug
http://pbase.com/dougj
I also could yo ask why you own such a lot of lenses. Why don´t have 4 cameras?
- EOS 30D for most of my pics
- D40 for IR work and with 18-55mm lens when Sigma 10-20mm is on 30D to have the range from 15-82mm
- S5 IS for videos and tele
- V7 on my belt to always have an camera with me as I want manual controls and don´t like cellphone cameras
--
You made a picture...fine!
You just answered the question you asked when you started the this thread - people have different needs, and desires. Needs usually, but not always, outweigh desires.
There is a lot of brand loyalty on DPR, but this is somewhat typical of a gear forum. You don't see this as much in forums that focus on the photography aspect.
Best regards,
Doug
http://pbase.com/dougj
There is a lot of brand loyalty on DPR, but this is somewhat typical of a gear forum. You don't see this as much in forums that focus on the photography aspect.
--
Best regards,
Doug
http://pbase.com/dougj
I couldn't care less what camera or lens people use or whether one brand is better than another. The only thing that matters is the quality of the photos they get from whatever equipment they have. You might want to ask yourself why it matters so much to you that there are fanboys in the forums. Nobody else cared enough about it to start a thread.
--
----------------
http://www.pbase.com/tmalcom/
But I don´t see a reason to defend "my" cameras. If some doesn´t like one of my cameras or can´t handle them...I don´t give a damn about this. But others are really upset if someone doesn´t praise their gear. That´t the whole problem.
--
You made a picture...fine!
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum