On 12/16/06, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yeah it was condescending. True enough. I apologize. :-)
No harm, no foul. :-) > Nothing wrong with well executed snapshots either. > > My point is probably multi-fold. > > Most people probably will not notice or look for the difference between 4x6 > size snapshots of any DSLR. However, they may read a review, and when they > read that the out-of-camera .jpg is lacking in sharpness and/or dynamic > range (regardless of whether they understand the terms) from Pentax, they > may look elsewhere. > > If I and others know this, why doesn't Pentax? I agree completely. Cheers, Dave > >From: "David Savage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> > >To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <pdml@pdml.net> > >Subject: Re: K10D review online > >Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 15:17:20 +0900 > > > >On 12/16/06, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Many of the people on this stinking PDML are not qualified. They have a > > > narcissistic relationship with the Pentax brand. > > > >Fair call. (Though it doesn't smell that bad :-) > > > > > Nor do they actually LOOK at the output they get. > > > >That's B.S. > > > >I don't put much stock in reviews, I read them to find out the spec's > >and features. More often than not I skip the comparison samples & > >conclusions. I use the equipment and after a while I come to some sort > >of subjective decision. I've spent an obscene amount of time looking > >at my shots (most narcissistic ;-) from the K10D. So far I'm happy > >enough. > > > > > A good 50% of the photos displayed here are nothing more than stinking > > > street shots of homeless people or mere snapshots with very little if > >any > > > consideration given to composition. > > > >That's a big call Tom. And a condescending one too. What's wrong with > >a well executed snapshot? Must all photo's posted be the epitome of > >fine art? > > > > > >Cheers, > > > >Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
