Robin Wong: Why Arguing About Equivalence Is Pointless Locked

Started 5 months ago | Discussions
This thread is locked.
Great Bustard Forum Pro • Posts: 45,199
Re: Of course, I have an opinion on that.

Carol T wrote:

I do have to wonder how many people on DPR would spend $4000 on diagnostics for a cat, though, on top of god knows how much in treatments over the last 1-1/2 years, lol. Probably could hire a lot of time with human models for that, if nothing else.

I think a lot of people would, to be honest.  In fact, if I had to bet, I'd say most.

RobbieBear Senior Member • Posts: 2,226
Re: Robin Wong: Why Arguing About Equivalence Is Pointless

Here's a thought:

What if we rename this sub forum: 'Micro Four Thirds owners' club'?

We could then reasonably assume that posters use MFT. Whether or not they have an understanding of equivalence becomes irrelevant - unless they pose a question which requires a comment/comparison with other systems.

Posts would then be limited to how users could get the best out of their chosen system.

Which brings us back to Robin Wong who, I believe (from his posted work), gets the best out of this system.

I understand equivalence.

I chose micro-four-thirds (this time around)

I am a happy bunny. 

 RobbieBear's gear list:RobbieBear's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Pro Olympus E-M1 II Panasonic 20mm F1.7 II Panasonic Lumix G Vario HD 12-32mm F3.5-5.6 Mega OIS +2 more
Great Bustard Forum Pro • Posts: 45,199
Re: Robin Wong: Why Arguing About Equivalence Is Pointless

RobbieBear wrote:

Here's a thought:

What if we rename this sub forum: 'Micro Four Thirds owners' club'?

Will this club be comparing other formats?  If so, Equivalence enters the chat.

We could then reasonably assume that posters use MFT. Whether or not they have an understanding of equivalence becomes irrelevant - unless they pose a question which requires a comment/comparison with other systems.

It's the mFT owners comparing mFT to FF *all the time*.

Posts would then be limited to how users could get the best out of their chosen system.

Then have a forum rule that comparisons to other formats is verboten.

Which brings us back to Robin Wong who, I believe (from his posted work), gets the best out of this system.

He does, indeed!

I understand equivalence.

I chose micro-four-thirds (this time around)

I am a happy bunny.

And no one says otherwise.

Great Bustard Forum Pro • Posts: 45,199
Re: Since you mentioned it...

John2004 wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

John2004 wrote:

When I pick up a sledge hammer, I always wonder how hard I need to swing to swing it, so I look to hammer equivalence. Obviously everyone knows the necessary speed is less than a 32oz Ball Pein hammer.

And no serious carpeted would hammer finishing nails without first figuring out what sledge equivalence is necessary either.

I find this all more helpful than worrying about camera equivalence. Never once have have thought about it when shooting with my old RX100, smartphone, or drone.

...here it is, linked in the introduction of the Equivalence Essay:

https://wordpress.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/03/hammerforum-com/

OK, I stole the idea.

Both a waste of time, and not as helpful as helpful as some make out.

OK, whatever.  The point is that my 16 oz Eastwing will lay waste your your sledge hammer.  I *create art* with my hammer -- you just wreak havoc and destruction with your bloated chunk of metal.

Great Bustard Forum Pro • Posts: 45,199
Re: Of course, I have an opinion on that.

victorav wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

OK, onto my rebuttal to Robin's rant/plea. I have to disagree. He accepts that Equivalence is a fact, and that one should at most, mention it once, and move on. Well how would that philosophy work if the same strategy were used on anti-vaxxers and/or anti-maskers? In response to their nonsense? Would you just link to a scholarly article or two on the reality of vaccines and masks and then let it go? The anti-vaxxers and anti-maskers would love it if you did.

Now, for sure, [Photographic] Equivalence isn't nearly as important as vaccines or wearing a mask. But the philosophy of failing to correct misinformation and misrepresentation, especially when it's intentional, in the name of peace is, well, not the best course.

For sure, you'll never convince the anti-Equivalence crowd that Equivalence is a fact, just as you'll never convince an anti-vaxxer that vaccines work or an anti-masker that wearing a mask saves lives. But, contrary to what many claim -- that everyone understands Equivalence and are just tired of the arguments -- no, not everyone understands Equivalence, and examples of that are legion.

This is not the same, false equivalence :). Why? Because lens selection does not affect the lives of others, or put others in a unnecessary danger.

Not the same results, but the same "reasoning".  That is, people who reject vaccines and masks, do so on the basis of willful ignorance and political motivation.  Exactly the same as people who reject Equivalence.

Do people who are vaccinated and wear masks tire of and get angry at health professionals telling others to vaccinate and wear masks?  No.  They tire of the anti-vaxxers and anti-maskers.

Conversely, those who tire of and get angry with people advocating Equivalence don't ever voice their objections and frustrations to the anti-Equivalence crowd.  Instead, they say "Everyone already understands Equivalence -- they just tire of hearing about it" even though the number of examples of people misunderstanding/misrepresenting Equivalence are legion, often including those claiming that everyone already understands!

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads