Say it Isn't So!!!!

Started Jan 4, 2012 | Discussions thread
JamieTux Veteran Member • Posts: 4,072
Re: petertan1959

Peter you are getting boring now!

petertan1959 wrote:

oh looking at your gallery too is very impressive. bananas, skulls, keyboards, fire buckets...

I see yours has photos that you didn't even take (motorbike shot)

but the BIG difference between you and me is that i did not blow $10k to take pictures of these mundane subjects. i still have money to waste on laptops & lenses.

Maybe his priorities are different to yours!

you are stuck with your primitive camera that costs more than a small house in hong kong!

And more than 30 years average wages in Malawi... your point is?

they are asking themselves how in the world did they fool so many people for so long a time!

Because people consistently created great images with them (this is not hard to grasp is it?)


BMW & Audi & Ferrari cars cost a fortune compared to a Toyota or Nissan.

But when you buy a Ferrari you have ALL the bells and whistles & power that you won't get from a Toyota or Nissan (although I would also doubt this).

Except for a usable boot, the ability to put your kid's pushchair in the boot, the same level of comfort, as good a stereo, the ability to sit 5 people in the car for a long journey...

My point is that the more expensive cars are giving you something different - not the same plus more power, they are just different.

you are paying a premium for a Ferrari because a Toyota has non of the 0-100 kmh in 3 secs acceleration. so it is ok to spend 10x the cost of a Toyota to get a Ferrari.

But a Mitsubishi EVO is quicker in a straight line than most ferraris, and a Nissan GT-R is a lot quicker round a track than most ferraris too, you are not paying for the performance, you are paying for the design, the heritage, the name and badge and the pleasure - the same reasons as a Leica.

but in Leica's case it is the reverse! you are paying a premium to use antiquated sensosr, electronics (none to speak of) & design.

Why is the sensor antiquated? Please point out to us poor deluded fools a sensor that gives better results at base iso outside of a medium format back - and then show us how to make a 3 lens kit that are good enough to make most use of the sensor for under 2 kgs.

PS have you heard of the Emperor's New Clothes fairy tale? Try to read up on it tonight!

If that's your view then that's fine and you are entitled to your own opinion but why post it here? There clearly are differences between every camera and choices that you have to make - just because people here have different requirements or preferences to you it does not make them stupid or make their opinions any less relevant than yours.

It feels like you are trying to judge everyone else by your own preferences and needs - we are all different - personally I loved the concept of the Fuji X100 - sensor size was irrelevant - the fact that MF was not very useful turned me off to it - also I used to own the Contax G2 - I loved everything about it - the lenses, the IQ, the feel, the size as a whole package - but I don't have it anymore as manual focus was impractical with it.

OK, I'm done now - I guess I am really asking you to look at the fact that other people will judge things differently to you and for you to take their point of view on board whether you agree with it or not instead of telling them that they are wrong.

 JamieTux's gear list:JamieTux's gear list
Nikon 1 J5 Fujifilm X-E3 Nikon 1 Nikkor 18.5mm f/1.8 Zeiss Touit 50mm F2.8 Nikon 1 Nikkor VR 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 PD-Zoom +6 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow