All Forum Comments
Comment by hefty1 posted on Problems connecting and external monitor at 01/02/2011 - 17:02
leytono wrote:
...would happily buy a K-5 if Pentax did a lens in that range or even better a 500mm f/4
Sigma currently make a 500/4.5 in Pentax fit - SRS have them in stock for just £3849.99. The Nikon 500/4 is currently available for around the £5800-mark and I'd expect any Pentax made lens of similar specification to be about the same price....would happily buy a K-5 if Pentax did a lens in that range or even better a 500mm f/4
To be honest, once you get into the realms of paying that much for a lens then just pick the one you want and buy an appropriate camera to hang off the back of it from your change pile...
Comment by hefty1 posted on My word..Canon owners want into the Pentax system.... at 01/02/2011 - 16:55
darkskies wrote:
Surely they must stay in this cheaper end?
They will. Once supplies of the K-x have dried up the K-r will drop in price (just as the K-x did when the K-m went out of production, and the K-m did when the K200D was dropped, etc). When the K-x was launched it was around the same price the K-r is now so it's not a new trend - there'll always be at least one bargain body with a Pentax badge.Surely they must stay in this cheaper end?
Mike-P wrote:
Daft idea .. Pentax were actually starting to look like a serious camera maker what with having a 5 camera lineup. Have even seens a few comments on various reviews saying as much.
I've never really seen the logic in this. Leica don't have as big a range as Pentax, nor do Hasselblad, Mamiya or PhaseOne. Yet I've never seen a review saying that these aren't serious because they don't don't have dozens of variations of the same camera (ahem, Sony) for sale.Daft idea .. Pentax were actually starting to look like a serious camera maker what with having a 5 camera lineup. Have even seens a few comments on various reviews saying as much.
Personally I'd rather Pentax concentrated on just having two or three good cameras at any given time. Just my $0.02
Comment by hefty1 posted on kx and k7 both officially discontinued? at 01/02/2011 - 10:05
I really, really like "Shall Not Park" - the tilted angle is just perfect for the composition.
Comment by hefty1 posted on People on the street, episode 12 at 01/02/2011 - 09:54
I'd go along pretty much exactly with what Mike says. Number 2 is a great portrait but 1 and 3 leave me a bit meh...
Comment by hefty1 posted on My first baby shoot! at 01/02/2011 - 09:52
Aero wrote:
I'm not sure that one line of small print at the bottom of a lengthy and comprehensive advertisement would get the seller off the hook against claims of deception. Currys certainly wouldn't be allowed to send you a photo of a washing machine just because they stuck a similar line at the end of their ads. A judge, I suspect, would find that the primary purpose of the advertisement was to deceive and rule accordingly. Small print is used to clarify the details of a transaction and not to fundamentally change an offer that has been laid out clearly beforehand.
It's not just the one line though - it's also in the title of the listing. Plus it was listed in Photography/Other rather than in one of the camera categories. Caveat emptor and all that...I'm not sure that one line of small print at the bottom of a lengthy and comprehensive advertisement would get the seller off the hook against claims of deception. Currys certainly wouldn't be allowed to send you a photo of a washing machine just because they stuck a similar line at the end of their ads. A judge, I suspect, would find that the primary purpose of the advertisement was to deceive and rule accordingly. Small print is used to clarify the details of a transaction and not to fundamentally change an offer that has been laid out clearly beforehand.
Mike-P wrote:
Although you can apply to have the money transferred to your bank account the second it appears in Paypal it is actually held in limbo for a couple of days by Paypal themselves (which is why it takes 5 days to reach your account). In that time they can recall it and then put a hold on the money until a dispute is resolved.
I had someone initiate a chargeback once due to buyer's remorse, mere minutes after I put in the transfer request. The money still arrived in my bank account despite the dispute being live. Maybe PayPal are selective about which funds they hold? Although you can apply to have the money transferred to your bank account the second it appears in Paypal it is actually held in limbo for a couple of days by Paypal themselves (which is why it takes 5 days to reach your account). In that time they can recall it and then put a hold on the money until a dispute is resolved.
Comment by hefty1 posted on always read the small print at 01/02/2011 - 01:01
Gwyn wrote:
Long time until tulip time. .
Not for me! I have six different varieties that I grow because they bloom at different times - first out of the ground are some lovely little orange dwarf tulips (whose name I forget) which appear towards the end of Feb. As they're going over I then have the others coming through so I have different tulips stretched over about three months, finishing with the gorgeous black Queen Of The Night. Then it's time to put the dahlias in the ground and I get excited all over again. Long time until tulip time. .
I'm easily pleased...
Smeggypants wrote:
You can recall your paypal payment though can't you?
If you make a chargeback then PayPal will freeze the seller's account until the dispute is resolved. Academic if he's already transferred said money to his bank account - he'll just have a negative balance in the meantime.You can recall your paypal payment though can't you?
To "win" the dispute the buyer would then have to prove that either (a) the item wasn't received or (b) that it was "significantly not as described". If the seller uses a tracked postal service he's covered on the former, and as the listing stated in both title and description that it was a picture for sale he's also covered on the latter.
PayPal/eBay don't like finding in favour of the buyer as they lose their fees so in this case I'm 99.9% certain the buyer's just going to have to suck it up.
The lesson's in the thread title - always read the small print...
Comment by hefty1 posted on always read the small print at 31/01/2011 - 23:20
Hardgravity wrote:
He's playing on peoples greed for a bargain and bringing ebay into a position of ill repute, surely they should give the buyer his cash back and ban the rip off merchant!!
From an ethical point of view they should. From a business perspective they won't. The seller may be underhand but he's within the letter of the law...He's playing on peoples greed for a bargain and bringing ebay into a position of ill repute, surely they should give the buyer his cash back and ban the rip off merchant!!
Don wrote:
I would write it off as an art purchase, most artwork goes up in value under the right circumstances...I wonder if the photo's value as art work would go up if the original artist was to die. A horrible, disfiguring, make the evening news type of death.
If I was the buyer I'd be thinking along those lines too I would write it off as an art purchase, most artwork goes up in value under the right circumstances...I wonder if the photo's value as art work would go up if the original artist was to die. A horrible, disfiguring, make the evening news type of death.
Comment by hefty1 posted on always read the small print at 31/01/2011 - 21:03
I've gone to my Nvidia window and it recognises both a Laptop display and an Analogue Display (which I presume is the Dell).