Correct, because goons filled up the last one with spam.
Oh, you really are full of it, aren't you?
as per my response to jerry on the same idiotic accusation:
Far from it, WilbaW disagrees with me and I highly respect his input. Olga somewhat disagrees with me and I always welcome her opinion.
Goons are those who dont understand the technical issues or having nothing valid to contribute yet cant refrain from spamming, howard and fred are prime examples but of different sort.
You want "discussion" (hah!) but when you get it, anyone who disagrees with you is a "goon".
not at all, you dont agree with me and I dont think you are a goon.
The truth is, you're not interested in discussion or dialogue at all. You're (ab)using this forum by using it as a soapbox from which to spout your ill-informed, narrow-minded little agendas.
please substantiate these allegations
what is my "ill-informed" agenda?
which part of my posts come is "narrow-minded"?
if you cant then they are baseless and are of pure bitching.
talking about narrow-mindedness. I have made it very clear many times on: 1, why limiting auto-iso is unnecessary. 2, I do not wish to convert anyone.
in the end of the day, if you still think you want limit auto-iso that is fine, but if you post this view in forum then you must accept that this view may get challenged, and when it gets challenged on its logical merit you must not ***** (for the lack of better word).
but that is exactly what you do, so far after many repeats of "you want limit to auto-iso" you have failed to really explain what possible merit it would bring, I in fact properly explained why it would be of no benefit. you have no real counter argument but you also can not get your head around, that makes you the narrow minded one.
Your posts are a waste of bandwidth.
then why do you waste yours opening my thread and posting in it with nothing but hate?
The fact is this: Auto-ISO as currently implemented - in the 7D, at least - misses the target by a pretty wide margin compared with the proven and much-appreciated Nikon implementation .
it is not as good as nikons, we know it and no one is challenging this view. you need not repeat it every chance you get. that does become a waste of bandwidth.
the only real hurdle is lack of fine tuned amplification 9and to a limited extent no EC). But as is it certainly
doesnt miss the target by a wide margin , full stop amplification with software fill the gaps is perfectly usable. further more, it is an inherent fault of amplification system but not auto-iso itself, you dont get 1/3 stop amplification even if you dont use auto-iso.
Your complete inability to understand why these functions matter in Auto ISO disqualifies you from having any useful opinion on the subject as far as I'm concerned - you obviously don't understand Real World use of Auto ISO.
your complete inability to see or explain the lack of rationale in limiting auto-iso equally disqualified you off my book. further, you inability to understand or accept that I simply have a different view on usefulness of EC where it is only a matter of hardware vs software small step amplification shows that you are unfit for any further discussion on this topic.
what separates you and me is I can explain my acceptance of absence of EC, but you can not explain your intolerance of lack of max iso limit.
Well, I've used Auto ISO when it's done properly - it was my default setting as a Nikon user - and I don't use it at all on my 7D.
do whatever you like, this thread was never about what you do. canon doesnt care and I dont either.
See if you can figure out why...
no one give a phuck.
clue: 
