All Forum Comments
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Pentax 17-70 any good? at 03/02/2011 - 19:42
robbie_d wrote:
My sincerest apologies to all (that includes you George).
Nice to know I'm part of "All" My sincerest apologies to all (that includes you George).
I'm fallible, you're illogical. Let's move on!
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on The Optio I-10 at 03/02/2011 - 18:43
To get back on topic, I do feel that the i10 is rather a damp squib. It's just an inexpensive p&s with a nod in the direction of the shape of the Auto-110.
It seems to have very mixed reviews concerning image quality, though in some cases those complaining seem to be DSLR owners who are not making sufficient allowance for the essential limitations of the camera type.
G
It seems to have very mixed reviews concerning image quality, though in some cases those complaining seem to be DSLR owners who are not making sufficient allowance for the essential limitations of the camera type.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on The Optio I-10 at 03/02/2011 - 18:33
My apologies.
G
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on The Optio I-10 at 03/02/2011 - 18:28
robbie_d wrote:
I've got good manners. Not 'great' or 'exceptional' but good enough.
You appear to be easily satisfied.I've got good manners. Not 'great' or 'exceptional' but good enough.
But, I look forward to an example of your good manners when you feel the stock of them is high enough that you can afford to waste some on this forum.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on The Optio I-10 at 03/02/2011 - 18:21
robbie_d wrote:
[quote:3496ace15f="Don"]
I did sell off all my Pentax gear. The Samsung is my Mums, bought from user on this very forum. A fine camera and one which I will be using to take the first picture of my first child which is due any day now.
Perhaps I should have said "have use of" rather than "use", although to be fair I get more use out of it than my Mum currently.
I hope that is enough to qualify me to post on this forum.
Well, good manners are also a pre-requisite.[quote:3496ace15f="Don"]
I did sell off all my Pentax gear. The Samsung is my Mums, bought from user on this very forum. A fine camera and one which I will be using to take the first picture of my first child which is due any day now.
Perhaps I should have said "have use of" rather than "use", although to be fair I get more use out of it than my Mum currently.
I hope that is enough to qualify me to post on this forum.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on The Optio I-10 at 03/02/2011 - 18:16
Why not get it repaired?
Then you could sell it at the normal second-hand price.
Anybody who buys it as-is will factor in the cost of repair, PLUS a figure for inconvenience/uncertainty. And that figure is likely to be significant.
G
Then you could sell it at the normal second-hand price.
Anybody who buys it as-is will factor in the cost of repair, PLUS a figure for inconvenience/uncertainty. And that figure is likely to be significant.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Faulty k20d for sale at 03/02/2011 - 17:45
Well, Robbie, let's have a look at your assertions.
The first paragraph contains another dig at me. Fair enough. After all, when his master stumbles, the jackass will bray.
It also makes the entirely erroneous assertion that people are saying that Pentax doesn't make a very long lens because it "isn't what people really want". Nobody has said that. It's the number of people who would be prepared to pay the necessarily high price that is the issue. Not a hard concept to grasp, surely.
The second paragraph is largely conjectural, but compares an item with a tiny potential market with a mass-market device, and pretends there is some sort of inconsistency. These are two utterly different things, and have nothing remotely to do with each other. And, contrary to your apparent view, Pentax's understanding of the mass market is not entirely flawed. Coloured cameras have been a big hit. Having said that, I concede that Canon has always been better at selling to the ignorant.
The third paragraph seems a little bitter. Perhaps you are miffed that you jumped ship just before the K5 came out. Can we look forward to you re-embarking, and giving us the pleasure of your company more often?
And the fourth and fifth paragraphs are hugely conjectural, especially as regards pricing.
The only paragraph I can't argue with is the last, where you have trodden new ground by being factual, at least in the first sentence.
G
The first paragraph contains another dig at me. Fair enough. After all, when his master stumbles, the jackass will bray.
It also makes the entirely erroneous assertion that people are saying that Pentax doesn't make a very long lens because it "isn't what people really want". Nobody has said that. It's the number of people who would be prepared to pay the necessarily high price that is the issue. Not a hard concept to grasp, surely.
The second paragraph is largely conjectural, but compares an item with a tiny potential market with a mass-market device, and pretends there is some sort of inconsistency. These are two utterly different things, and have nothing remotely to do with each other. And, contrary to your apparent view, Pentax's understanding of the mass market is not entirely flawed. Coloured cameras have been a big hit. Having said that, I concede that Canon has always been better at selling to the ignorant.
The third paragraph seems a little bitter. Perhaps you are miffed that you jumped ship just before the K5 came out. Can we look forward to you re-embarking, and giving us the pleasure of your company more often?
And the fourth and fifth paragraphs are hugely conjectural, especially as regards pricing.
The only paragraph I can't argue with is the last, where you have trodden new ground by being factual, at least in the first sentence.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on The Optio I-10 at 03/02/2011 - 17:15
I'd love to see a digital Pentax 110. Now there's a walk-around holiday camera.
G
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on kx and k7 both officially discontinued? at 03/02/2011 - 15:32
The equipment required to make sensors is hugely complex and expensive, so I think it is unlikely that any serious camera manufacturer other than Sony, Canon, and Panasonic would have the resources for such an investment.
It is also necessary in most cases to sell sensors to other parties in order to recover the costs. This is what Sony does. Canon makes so many cameras that it may be able to afford to produce sensors just for its own bodies.
So I think Nikon is a long way from making its own sensors, though I have no quarrel with the claim that it specifies them.
One wonders whether Philips will ever dip its toe in this murky water again.
G
It is also necessary in most cases to sell sensors to other parties in order to recover the costs. This is what Sony does. Canon makes so many cameras that it may be able to afford to produce sensors just for its own bodies.
So I think Nikon is a long way from making its own sensors, though I have no quarrel with the claim that it specifies them.
One wonders whether Philips will ever dip its toe in this murky water again.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on kx and k7 both officially discontinued? at 03/02/2011 - 15:30
The only niggle I have with the 17-70 is the focusing. Sometimes it just will not lock on to the focus. I don't think it's a problem with SDM, I believe it just needs very good contrast in the subject. IQ wise it very good.
Optically it is excellent, and usefully longer than the 16-45.
G