Nikon

In message <k1f8k.10669$jI5.5230@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com>, Paul Furman
<paul-.DeleteThis@-edgehill.net> writes
>Jake wrote:
>> Is it just me, or are there a lot of stupid posts here supporting Nikon?
>
>Yeah, it seems there were more fanatical Canon posts a year or 2 ago.
>It goes in waves.
>
I would say that Canon and Nikon leapfrog each other every 12 months or
so. This year (D300 and D3) is Nikons year in the sun. Next year it
will be Canon.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon 

user.DeleteThis@domain.invalid wrote:
> Charles wrote:
>> "Jake" <me.DeleteThis@privacy.com> wrote in message
>> news:7bWdnWNWsJAB_PzVnZ2dnUVZ8uednZ2d@pipex.net...
>>> Is it just me, or are there a lot of stupid posts here supporting Nikon?
>>
>> Funny you should ask that. I have observed the same thing. There seem to
>> be many more Nikon zealots here than for any other camera brand.
>>
>> Why would that be?
>>
>> 1/ Canon pissed them off?
>> 2/ They are envious?
>> 3/ They are just agitators looking for fertile ground (lots of Canon folks
>> here)?
>> 4/ They are simply in need of stronger meds?

> A fifth possibility is that they are paid by Nikon to do this.

Why should Nikon bother, when there are plenty who have paid
themselves to do it? They buy a very expensive camera without checking
out all the options on the advice of a salesman or friend, and then
are scared that they might have made an expensive mistake. So they
attack anyone who praises another camera.

You'd expect to find the largest number of these paranoid purchasers
supporting whatever brand is widely regarded by camera shop salesmen
as the best.

--
Chris Malcolm cam.DeleteThis@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon 

It's strange why people are so territorial about camera brands.

I bet you don't get people in gardening newsgroups constantly saying how
much better their Black & Decker lawnmower is than any other.


"David J Taylor"
<david-taylor DeleteThis @blueyonder.neither-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote in
message news:7tk8k.15351$E41.15065@text.news.virginmedia.com...


> .. about the same number as for Canon! Filter out one or two posters and
> you may get a pleasanter view of the newsgroup.
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon 

Jake wrote:
> It's strange why people are so territorial about camera brands.

brand loyalty is total rubbish. The inverse is not necessarily true -
there are brands to be avoided at all costs e.g. anything made by Suzuki
or Disney

T
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon 

In message <6cee83F3gdflnU4 DeleteThis @mid.individual.net>, Chris Malcolm
<cam DeleteThis @holyrood.ed.ac.uk> writes
>
>Why should Nikon bother, when there are plenty who have paid
>themselves to do it? They buy a very expensive camera without checking
>out all the options on the advice of a salesman or friend, and then
>are scared that they might have made an expensive mistake. So they
>attack anyone who praises another camera.
>
>You'd expect to find the largest number of these paranoid purchasers
>supporting whatever brand is widely regarded by camera shop salesmen
>as the best.

I have found over the last few years that you now get most types of
pedant and lunatic on Usenet. Google groups have made it infinitely
worse.

There are many very sad people who will argue

Nikon (Gods Own Camera* Vs Canon (complete rubbish obviously
20Mp vs 6Mp as being minimum essential MP for a DSLR
film resolution over digital resolution & dynamic range
zoom lenses over Prime lenses (and moving to get the right picture)
DSLR vs 35mm
35mm over medium format.
Cd over LP
Michelin over Dunlop
coke over pepsi
tango over fanta

and so it goes on. These people NEED to score points no matter how petty
of minor to prove their superiority over other people.

For many I think it is to compensate for a failure in the Real World
with Real People. I suspect most have unfulfilled home or
professional lives though they would no admit it.



*Actually God uses A Kodak Instamatic 126 but because she is God gets
perfect prints every time.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon 

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 10:12:49 +0100, Chris H wrote:

> *Actually God uses A Kodak Instamatic 126 but because she is God gets
> perfect prints every time.

Wrong!

Even God can't always coax perfect prints from her Epson . . .
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon 

On 6/25/08 9:19 AMJun 25, "ASAAR" <caught DeleteThis @22.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 10:12:49 +0100, Chris H wrote:
>
>> *Actually God uses A Kodak Instamatic 126 but because she is God gets
>> perfect prints every time.
>
> Wrong!
>
> Even God can't always coax perfect prints from her Epson . . .
>
COAX? God doesn't need to use cables.
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon 

In message <9qWdneLI6N0AYvzVRVnyvQA RemoveThis @posted.plusnet>, Tony B
<tony RemoveThis @thebramahs.plus.com> writes
>Jake wrote:
>> It's strange why people are so territorial about camera brands.
>
>brand loyalty is total rubbish. The inverse is not necessarily true -
>there are brands to be avoided at all costs e.g. anything made by
>Suzuki or Disney

I have has some very good Suzuki Motorbikes (admittedly 30 years ago)

I agree about Disney.
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon 

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 10:09:33 -0400, Robert Haar wrote:

>> Wrong!
>>
>> Even God can't always coax perfect prints from her Epson . . .
>
> COAX? God doesn't need to use cables.

So that explains why *we* are stuck with Larry The Cable Guy.
(What hath God wrought?)
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon 

ASAAR wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 22:04:49 +0100, Jake wrote:
>
>> Is it just me, or are there a lot of stupid posts here supporting Nikon?
>
> No, it's not just you. But not all of those that are stupid as a
> post support Nikon. Many dolts also support Canon, Fuji, Kodak,
> Minolta, Olympus, Panasonic, Pentax and Sony cameras. Which brands
> do *you* support?
>
Samsung - you forgot Samsung. There are bound to be some people who
support Samsung,
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon 

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:31:29 +1200, frederick wrote:

>>> Is it just me, or are there a lot of stupid posts here supporting Nikon?
>>
>> No, it's not just you. But not all of those that are stupid as a
>> post support Nikon. Many dolts also support Canon, Fuji, Kodak,
>> Minolta, Olympus, Panasonic, Pentax and Sony cameras. Which brands
>> do *you* support?
>>
> Samsung - you forgot Samsung. There are bound to be some people who
> support Samsung,

Of course, they are legion. But how could there be any stupid
supporters of Samsung, universally acknowledged as makers of the
worlds finest cameras? I can be forgiven for forgetting Ricoh, as
they're almost impossible to find, at least over here . . .
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon 

frederick wrote:
[]
> Samsung - you forgot Samsung. There are bound to be some people who
> support Samsung,

I don't know about the US - but in the UK Samsung is current running an
advert about their cameras having millions of pixels, but only "thousands"
of colours. Makes it a brand to avoid in my view - I want far more
colours than that!

(Noted that each pixel may only be quantised to 10-14 bits, so perhaps
they are being /too/ honest!).

David
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon 

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 05:15:42 GMT, "David J Taylor"
<david-taylor RemoveThis @blueyonder.neither-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:

>frederick wrote:
>[]
>> Samsung - you forgot Samsung. There are bound to be some people who
>> support Samsung,
>
>I don't know about the US - but in the UK Samsung is current running an
>advert about their cameras having millions of pixels, but only "thousands"
>of colours. Makes it a brand to avoid in my view - I want far more
>colours than that!
>

But looking at the images on a Samsung monitor is kick-ass. My
SyncMaster 2253LW eliminates bad bokeh, is sharp enough to allow me to
count an Osprey's eyelashes, and pops this up on the screen whenever
Helen comments on one of Bret's photo links:
http://img1.jurko.net/avatar_2332.gif
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon