carstenw Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
p.4 #14 · Digital back for 35mm cameras | |
Jewced wrote:
Here we go:
1) "Throw away" is a verb. "Disposable" is an adjective. The words cannot be synonyms because they are different parts of speech. "Synonyms" are words that "mean the same thing", in case you're wondering.
2) Obsoleteness is not "in your head". It refers to something that is out of date or "no longer produced or used". Try to take on a team of Navy SEALS with a militia from the American Revolution. You'll find out what "obsolete" means pretty quick. In terms of photography, obsolete has the same meaning. Although we're talking about an art, and an artist will use whatever tool is right for the job, regardless of age, we can still consider things, by definition, obsolete when they are no longer in production.
3) You cannot compare anything from decades ago to the modern internet. Nothing has ever had the speed, accessibility, and world-wide coverage that the internet does. People can readily publish their original content on the web and have it seen by thousands, sometimes millions, of people. People from across the world can collaborate and engage in discussions that would not be possible without the internet. Communication is essentially instantaneous with the internet, which brings me to my next point...
4) As you said, the pace of things in the past was much slower than it is today. I'm not sure if you like older cameras because they force you to work at a slower pace (film), because they feel nice in your hand, or because they have some sort of sentimental value. I'm not trying to say that your personal preference is "wrong", because that's a matter of opinion. Bottom line is that you made a completely ignorant statement about film "sucking ass". Without film the bodies which you like using wouldn't exist. You don't have to like it, but you should understand the impact it has. The slower pace of life in those simpler days was because of film. With digital it's all about speed. Transfer speed, burst speed, write speed. There was emphasis on speed in the past as well (just look at cameras like the Nikon F5) but not in the same way. If you want slow and simple, you go to film. I don't understand why you like old bodies because they're slower and simple but seem so eager to shoehorn speedy digital technology into them....Show more →
Oh, ferchrissake, this is just getting ridiculous. You seem to excel in being obstinate and wrong at the same time. Others can pick up this fight if they like, I am just going to use the "Hide Me" button. *click*.
FWIW, here are the short forms of my answers:
1) Lotus answered this one already, but allow me to continue: I didn't say that "throw away" and "disposable" were synonyms, I said they meant the same thing. See if you can figure out how your answer is completely irrelevant to what I said.
2) Obsolete as used earlier by you meant no more useful. Of course a camera which has been superseded is not no longer useful. You can continue using it as long as it works. I am doing this with my D3.
3) I can compare anything I want. You can get all huffy and puffy about it if you like though, feel free, just ignore me laughing at you in the background. You conveniently forgot to bring up the part where you were being ridiculous about nikonrumours.com not existing in '60. Thanks for the useless, out of place, and out of date explanation of what the internet is, although I was talking about the WWW.
4) I like old cameras because they are simple and feel good in the hands. I like not looking at the LCD after every shot. I make better photos with my D3, however, so I would never trade, and will continue using both.
Bonus point: it wasn't me who said that film sucks ass, I think that was Bif. I quite like film, actually. Try to get your attributions right, will you?
Look, I would be exceptionally pleased if you could even make a single point stick, so it wouldn't feel so one-sided, but you seem incapable of making a good point and backing it up properly. Over and out.
|