Hey Rriley. Just thought I'd pop by using a friend's old account to
clear up a bit of your usual mess. No, luckyakash isn't me, nor are
many of the other IDs you've accused of being me. But, I do stay in
contact with a few people and lurk from time to time. So, let's
begin with the cleaning, eh?
well you might remember when i asked if a poster was you some time earlier, it turned out it was you, but you were not straight with me, so i bounced you
on that basis i think i can be forgiven for having doubts about your identity
and i still think im right
oh wait, let me think back
as i recall it when joseph was banned, it was for the complaints filed for
using that stuff to bash four thirds format. true or false?
That would be "false". I never bashed 4/3 -- this post sums it up
pretty nicely:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=29000993
"I suspect you would put JoeMama firmly in the troll category. I
cut for needed room
heres mine, its reduced in size to be concise
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=28598934
"But of what value is the concomitant abusive behavior engendered by (some if not most of) those threads??? It only drags the whole place down, and when it is done repeatedly, between the same few guys it really needs to be stopped because it ceases to serve public interest and becomes a battleground for a clash of the egos.
It seems silly to acquit someone of personal responsibility for fighting and general incivility (which obviously goes both ways) because their general (and redundant) point was based in fact.
It would be the same if that 4/3rds guy he would argue with was banned and subsequently had a thread eulogizing him for stating the obvious point that smaller formats tend to have more even lens coverage. It is a fact of the science, but he would sit there and go around in circles with Joe to the point where it isn't even a debate but a infantile mudslinging contest."
or any of the other posts by mine which I link and quote here:
http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/dprban/#bashing
you mean that place were you ***** about you bans blaming anyone but you, whats your 50% in that Joe? Its not like its once, its what 7 times...
then theres this
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=31042395
i dont ban anyone here, he does
you wanna be unbanned, talk to him
on the same technology there is no 'noise advantage' to smaller formats,
Yes, I was in error and cleared that up later after spending a lot of
time trying to figure out why Amin's test produced the results it did.
since the light allowed through by the aperture is the same value per sq
mm of effective sensor area, the noise is the same on the same sensor
technology,
But there are two components to noise, shot and read. So, while
equivalent images will have the same shot noise, the read noise is
not necessarily the same, even for the same efficiency of sensor, due
to different pixel counts, but that this can be evened out with NR
and comparing at the same level of detail. However, what I later
learned in the the test done by Amin is that the 5D had a
less
efficient sensor than the compact, so the greater read noise of the
5D over the Fuji compact was the reason for the more noise image.
So, are you now chastising me for having erroneously thought that
smaller formats might have a noise advantage in some extreme
situations? How delightfully ironic!
why not post that retraction on your page
at least it would be informative
and from Steen
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=28401655
"The way I see it, the biggest difference between FF and crop is the possibility to get ultra shallow DOF with FF if you want it. And ultra shallow DOF usually (with WA lenses) goes hand in hand with vignetting and soft corners, but that's just a fact of life, at least with the current retro-focus design of WA lenses (The EVIL might change that), so why all the fuss about it?"
thanks
heres another, its Royal Australian Army
oh and get my rank right...
You mean this one?
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=30460780
Anyway, while we're on "getting things right", do try not to confuse
other people's posts with mine. I'm a bit disappointed that you
can't tell the difference.
i was Sgt Major for 19 yrs like i wrote, but i had to make a deal with the brass to get over to Iraq II with my companies. The cutoff age for combat with us is 43, and i'm way past that. Prior to this I had turned a commission down 3 times, they told me if i wanted to go, i had to accept #3, so i did.
since you cannot/would not be aware of my rank, and im not going to tell you, i suggest you remove all reference to it.
--
Riley
When I die I want to go peacefully sleeping like my Grandfather did...
not screaming, like the passengers in his car....
