We get it that you like your Pentax. I personally think they are
making really nice cameras. Now. They did come late to the party after
all and many of us did not wait so long as you to move into digital. I
for one am happy that Pentax has decided to make a go of it. It is a
fine and historically significant name.
I don't know why you recently feel impelled to bash other cameras. No
one here is bashing Pentax even though most of use other cameras. The
Nikon bashing makes me wonder whether you are not really happy with
your choice after all and have to do it to justify it to yourself.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On / December 29, 2007 CE, at 3:27 PM, Larry wrote:
> Yes, anyone who thinks that spending $5000-$8000+ on a Nikon D3 is
> going
> to make their photography "better" than some cameras even less than
> half
> that price is deluding themselves. That level of camera more caters to
> those that don't have the capability to capture exciting sports shots
> without 10 frames a second, so need to whip out that many thousands so
> they can weed through hundreds of shots for a few that luckily caught
> what works.
>
> Some pay Nikon prices really just to say they use Nikon, but find the
> need to point out insignificant reasons such as the method by which
> it
> converts to black & white in the field, or some trivial thing like
> that
> as the actual reasons they chose to pay double for the brand, or
> didn't
> like another. Considering the expense of the top glass, "buying the
> system" is always a dumb mantra, though it helps makes the financially
> comfortable enjoy overpaying.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|