So... I finally come to a decision to go with the OM-D... Is there any big hand users out there?

Started Mar 13, 2013 | Questions thread
texinwien Veteran Member • Posts: 3,326
Re: Issue 1: inconsistent in-camera ISO labelling

Jack Hogan wrote:

texinwien wrote:

Jack Hogan wrote:

texinwien wrote:

Jack Hogan wrote: Duck, duck, duck. All I can say is that when people run out of arguments they shoot the messenger.

Your statement makes no sense. I have shot down your argument, but I've never aimed at you, personally. Ad hominem isn't my style.

Really? I must have misread what consitutes about half of the words in your message then:

Indeed - I only addressed your misconceptions, your erroneous conclusion and your errors in logic - all parts of your argument. None of these were attacks on your person.

I am several steps ahead of you, in that I understand the error in logic you're making that brings you to your erroneous conclusion - the very misconception of yours that...

And this is your misconception.

I'll answer your misconception...

Yes, saying you've run out of ideas is, again, attacking the insufficiency of your argument.

Jacks' run out of ideas is more like it, amiright?

So, yes, I'm not sure which of my words you misunderstood, since none of them (at least none of the ones you quoted here) have anything to do with ad hominem.

No. The words mention ONE misconception that you have, and that misconception forms a crucial part of your false argument - again, attacking the argument, and not you.

And by the way - your primary misconception, the one I have mentioned from my very first post to you on this subject, is that you think (thought?) you can (could?) ...

My gosh, so many words, so little time. There are two issues here:

1) Inconsistent in-camera ISO labelling by manufacturers; and
2) How to set up two cameras to fairly compare their SNR performance in the same scene, subject to the same artistic intent.

Let's take them one at a time, lest we get confused by too many words. Here is what I said in my first post here about issue 1)

"The issue is that if you take in-camera ISOs at face value you end up comparing apples to oranges, especially with the EM5 which is a relative outlier in its ISO interpretation"

Ok. Point out the misconception and erroneous conclusion here.

No sir, we're going to do this the other way. I have pointed out the error in your first 'proof' that your idea is correct.

Your first proof is simply invalid. I take it from your silence that you agree with me, but simply don't want to discuss the glaring error you made there.

So, I will ask YOU again, to provide a proof that is not invalid, and that is also not a complete fiction. You're making the claims here, you back them up. Your first attempt to do that was a miserable failure, since you completely forgot to equalize exposure, exposure being the #1 most important part of photography.


 texinwien's gear list:texinwien's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 OnePlus One Canon EOS 300D +20 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow