Well I consider the hundred quid I paid for mine to be bloody expensive. My previous most expensive camera was 60 quid for an APS and that was only because APS was new - a 35mm camera with the same features would have cost 25 quidish.
Yeah but a 35mm is good enough for most people. They want holiday snaps not David Baileyesque pics. I put myself firmly in that bracket - I only went digital because I could do stuff (like post here) with the pics easier.
I paid the extra money for APS because I'm cack handed and can't do the the whole 35mm on spindle teeth and wind on malarkey - the number of films I was ruining by not inserting properly made the extra 20 quid or so seem worth it.
I did say David Baileyesque 'pics' not camera. By that I meant (and you know I meant) 'not simple snapshots' ie most people want summat that's capable of taking a simple picture of their kids on the beach. Paying anything more than 30 quid for something to do that is in my book (and the majority of people's I would guess) too expensive.
Their kids on the beach / parents in the garden / their cock in their gf's eye... whatever.
Yes we'll drop the most people metric. I think 100 quid is too expensive - as I think I've said.
I use mine to take snaps and don't give a flying fsck about focal length, shutter speed or any other techno camera shit - and neither does anybody else judging by the way everyone deserted the thread once we^H^Hyou got into camera specs.
You didn't but you did get deeply into the camera shite. Lenses! WTF!?!?! Nobody gives a shite. I'm posting on here whilst working to give myself a break from the tedium of reams of SQL - the last thing I want to be reading is this 12 acres of fscking camera reviews!
I wasn't even arguing with you to begin with - I was doing general camera small talk in agreement. I said the hundred quid was too much for me, brought up previous highest price paid (for APS which was expensive compared to equiv 35 mm). You then said 35mm was shite, I said it was good enough for most people (which included me) then your replies just got longer, boring, more irritating. It's a camera FFS. It takes pictures. Woo fscking yay!
And ok if you want 'most people' back in for discussion (which was dropped because you didn't think it relevant!) most people I know with cameras have a 35mm. Most people I know would think 300 quid which is too expensive. And I agree with them. The 'most people' bit was relevant to 'what you class as expensive' or were you meaning me rather than people in general?
35mm was good enough for me not because most people had them but because it does the job I had one for. I bought APS before most people but only for it's ease of loading - not it's tech aspects of different sized pictures and printed contact sheet. I bought digital for ease of getting onto a pc not because of it's features. I'm into gadgets and I've waited until fairly recently to buy a digicam - because they've been too expensive up to now. All I want is simple picture taking - I wasn't prepared to pay 100 plus quid for a camera which took pictures no discernibly better at the time than ones I took with my 35mm.
Right that's me finished on the subject of cameras - forever. Probably.
You want pedantry? Disposable has a letter a in it. PARP!
Of course I'm going to reply - I'm easily baited! My ego is the one holding the gun. ;)
The conversation was fairly (totally?) non snarky until your comment at 2:53. Then you launched into your 'most people' little rantette. Now I don't know about you about I found my mother using the 'jump off Tyne Bridge' cack patronising as fsck - at the age of 7. 30 years later and a whole shitload more attitude I find it even more so. As I said I'm easily baited - of course I'm going to reply.
As for using and dropping an argument in the same post - I dropped it in the comment at 3:26 and there was no use of it at all in that comment. Hmmm - methinks you're seeing things. Something you've criticised me of in the past - like at 4:12 today.
16 comments:
Somewhere your auto focus didn't work...?
;)
Morning Mr. Re-post.
I'll Popbitch you, try a bit closer to home
I really wouldn't start playing the repost game ILN - I've been biting my tongue for days but if it's open season.... ;)
I seem to have had a comment disappeared - unless this flushes it out.
If it wasn't for the eagle I'd go for Heaton Park Pavilion.
And I'd keep quite on reposts if I were you ILN - or someone may point out the several you've done since we decided to stop picking on them. :)
Looks like i've got you's today.
Do you need another photo?
please...
and it's just as funny second time around.
Come on chaps, let's all chip in for a tripod for him.
Either that or ol' shakey hands keeps going to places of seismic disturbance....
What happened with the DIY tripods?
That looks very expensive.
Well I consider the hundred quid I paid for mine to be bloody expensive. My previous most expensive camera was 60 quid for an APS and that was only because APS was new - a 35mm camera with the same features would have cost 25 quidish.
Yeah but a 35mm is good enough for most people. They want holiday snaps not David Baileyesque pics. I put myself firmly in that bracket - I only went digital because I could do stuff (like post here) with the pics easier.
I paid the extra money for APS because I'm cack handed and can't do the the whole 35mm on spindle teeth and wind on malarkey - the number of films I was ruining by not inserting properly made the extra 20 quid or so seem worth it.
You pedantic fusker! :)
I did say David Baileyesque 'pics' not camera. By that I meant (and you know I meant) 'not simple snapshots' ie most people want summat that's capable of taking a simple picture of their kids on the beach. Paying anything more than 30 quid for something to do that is in my book (and the majority of people's I would guess) too expensive.
More pedantry...
Their kids on the beach / parents in the garden / their cock in their gf's eye... whatever.
Yes we'll drop the most people metric. I think 100 quid is too expensive - as I think I've said.
I use mine to take snaps and don't give a flying fsck about focal length, shutter speed or any other techno camera shit - and neither does anybody else judging by the way everyone deserted the thread once we^H^Hyou got into camera specs.
You didn't but you did get deeply into the camera shite. Lenses! WTF!?!?! Nobody gives a shite. I'm posting on here whilst working to give myself a break from the tedium of reams of SQL - the last thing I want to be reading is this 12 acres of fscking camera reviews!
I wasn't even arguing with you to begin with - I was doing general camera small talk in agreement. I said the hundred quid was too much for me, brought up previous highest price paid (for APS which was expensive compared to equiv 35 mm). You then said 35mm was shite, I said it was good enough for most people (which included me) then your replies just got longer, boring, more irritating. It's a camera FFS. It takes pictures. Woo fscking yay!
And ok if you want 'most people' back in for discussion (which was dropped because you didn't think it relevant!) most people I know with cameras have a 35mm. Most people I know would think 300 quid which is too expensive. And I agree with them. The 'most people' bit was relevant to 'what you class as expensive' or were you meaning me rather than people in general?
35mm was good enough for me not because most people had them but because it does the job I had one for. I bought APS before most people but only for it's ease of loading - not it's tech aspects of different sized pictures and printed contact sheet. I bought digital for ease of getting onto a pc not because of it's features. I'm into gadgets and I've waited until fairly recently to buy a digicam - because they've been too expensive up to now. All I want is simple picture taking - I wasn't prepared to pay 100 plus quid for a camera which took pictures no discernibly better at the time than ones I took with my 35mm.
Right that's me finished on the subject of cameras - forever. Probably.
You want pedantry? Disposable has a letter a in it. PARP!
Of course I'm going to reply - I'm easily baited! My ego is the one holding the gun. ;)
The conversation was fairly (totally?) non snarky until your comment at 2:53. Then you launched into your 'most people' little rantette. Now I don't know about you about I found my mother using the 'jump off Tyne Bridge' cack patronising as fsck - at the age of 7. 30 years later and a whole shitload more attitude I find it even more so. As I said I'm easily baited - of course I'm going to reply.
As for using and dropping an argument in the same post - I dropped it in the comment at 3:26 and there was no use of it at all in that comment. Hmmm - methinks you're seeing things. Something you've criticised me of in the past - like at 4:12 today.
Pedantry - you can't whack it. Or something.
Twat! :)
You'd only catch me laughing at your puny zoom powers - you want a Canon Powershot S1 IS to do the job properly. Oh fsck here we go.. ;)
Post a Comment