New: Nikon D5000

Post by Focus
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=31583013
http://www.sofmap.com/product_detail/exec/_/sku=11190059/-/gid=AW0301...
2.7 swivel screen
Price about 650 ?
--
---
Focus

Seems (as with Olympus) the stratification of the low end is getting
finer and finer.

ASAAR

2009-04-14 22:18:00 UTC

The idiot "Focus" will buy one, and find that one or two of his images
are out of focus, or poorly exposed. He will then post at length about
his "problems" on here, displaying the usual near-complete lack of
knowledge of the basic principles of photography.
. . .
Well, you should know the routine by now. It repeats itself every time
Nikon introduces a new model. ;-)

To satisfy you and your illiterate buddies: yes, I will buy this one for a
number of reasons.

Chief among them is that just as it is with the fabled scorpion,
you will buy because it is your nature.

Poor Canon must be in tears: they never come up with something new or
original. Just some increase in MP at the cost of IQ with every single new
camera.

With pronouncements such as these, are you surprised that some
people regard you as an idiot? FYI, many of Canon's DSLRs (starting
with, but not limited to the 40D and 50D) are much better for macro
and some other types of photography than anything Nikon or other
companies offer, because Canon came up with something new and
original. Not long ago Nikon introduced three impressive PC-E
Nikkors, but Canon just trumped them with their new offering, which
also benefited from something new and original, at least where DSLR
lenses are concerned. Nikon now has some DSLRs that provide
amazingly good low noise, high ISO performance, but not until the D3
put them near par with Canon's DSLRs, which for several years had
sensors that offered something new and better than what other
manufacturers provided. While you may not be an idiot, you sure
display an unfortunate combination of ignorance, lack of wisdom, and
the propensity to have strong opinions of things you know little of.

All people seem to be idiots to you, aren't they?
You're just too kind with words.

I normally wouldn't have commented on that poorly constructed
sentence, but as you followed it with one talking about "words", it
seemed to beg for someone to help you out by noting that you should
have paid more attention in class when the rules for assembling
words into proper sentences were taught. Know whut I mean, Vern?

Focus

2009-04-15 11:49:59 UTC

To satisfy you and your illiterate buddies: yes, I will buy this one for a
number of reasons.

Chief among them is that just as it is with the fabled scorpion,
you will buy because it is your nature.

And that would be a bad thing, right?
If more people stopped complaining about this darn "crisis" and buy more
stuff like me, the whole "crisis" would be over in a heartbeat.

Poor Canon must be in tears: they never come up with something new or
original. Just some increase in MP at the cost of IQ with every single new
camera.

I'm not talking about the past. I live in the here and now. The last few
camera that came out from Canon have seen an increase in MP, but a decrease
in IQ, while Nikon has gone the other way: same "old" 12 MP, but every new
one has an increase in IQ.
Don't know about others, but I prefer the latter.

All people seem to be idiots to you, aren't they?
You're just too kind with words.

Well, excuse me for the fact that I speak 4 languages fluently, 3 more a
little bit and Portuguese I'm still learning. English being my second
language.
After a car accident, a few years ago, my spelling isn't that great anymore.
But before I post again, I'll have it checked by my sister who's a professor
in English literature.

--
---
Focus

Rob Morley

2009-04-15 12:40:26 UTC

On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 12:49:59 +0100

Post by Focus
After a car accident, a few years ago, my spelling isn't that great anymore.

So did you have OCD/impulse control problems before your brain injury,
or did they result from it?

ASAAR

2009-04-15 15:09:48 UTC

Post by ASAAR
With pronouncements such as these, are you surprised that some
people regard you as an idiot? FYI, many of Canon's DSLRs (starting
with, but not limited to the 40D and 50D) are much better for macro
and some other types of photography than anything Nikon or other
companies offer, because Canon came up with something new and
original. Not long ago Nikon introduced three impressive PC-E
Nikkors, but Canon just trumped them with their new offering, which
also benefited from something new and original, at least where DSLR
lenses are concerned. Nikon now has some DSLRs that provide
amazingly good low noise, high ISO performance, but not until the D3
put them near par with Canon's DSLRs, which for several years had
sensors that offered something new and better than what other
manufacturers provided. While you may not be an idiot, you sure
display an unfortunate combination of ignorance, lack of wisdom, and
the propensity to have strong opinions of things you know little of.

Only the last (better high ISO performance) refers to Canon's past
superiority. Nikon is still behind Canon in the other areas
mentioned. Did this escape your attention or is your problem one of
comprehension? Also, you can ask your sister to also proofread that
last sentence.

All people seem to be idiots to you, aren't they?
You're just too kind with words.

It's not about a spelling error. You also didn't pay attention to
the words that I wrote, because you'll see that you were told that
the problem had to do with the words that you used. Spelling errors
or typos tend to be due to letter mistakes. The ability to speak
eight languages would normally be something to be admired, but in
your case we'd like to know if you switched to the other languages
when you found something in the previous ones that displeased you.

Focus

2009-04-15 20:57:39 UTC

Vraag jij je zus maar of je haar vanavond weer neuken mag. Achterlijk stuk
inteelt.

All people seem to be idiots to you, aren't they?
You're just too kind with words.

Als je het over wij hebt, bedoel je ook de stemmetjes in je hoofd zeker?
Zoek een baan, langharig werkschuw tuig...

Wally

2009-04-15 21:57:14 UTC

Post by ASAAR
Only the last (better high ISO performance) refers to Canon's past
superiority. Nikon is still behind Canon in the other areas
mentioned. Did this escape your attention or is your problem one of
comprehension? Also, you can ask your sister to also proofread that
last sentence.

Vraag jij je zus maar of je haar vanavond weer neuken mag. Achterlijk stuk
inteelt.

Post by ASAAR
It's not about a spelling error. You also didn't pay attention to
the words that I wrote, because you'll see that you were told that
the problem had to do with the words that you used. Spelling errors
or typos tend to be due to letter mistakes. The ability to speak
eight languages would normally be something to be admired, but in
your case we'd like to know if you switched to the other languages
when you found something in the previous ones that displeased you.

Als je het over wij hebt, bedoel je ook de stemmetjes in je hoofd zeker?
Zoek een baan, langharig werkschuw tuig...

Say what you want, but this is one of the best NGs to learn new swear
words.

I used to know an even better one, but it has since died... nobody
there any more.

People come here for information on digital photography. But the
regulars surely have enough of that already, so are here for
companionship. Those lonely people spend their time here vehemently
cursing out people they don't even know.

Can you understand it?

As for you, Focus, the best I can offer you is Uitgedroogd stukje
vetpudding!

Wally

ASAAR

2009-04-15 22:59:19 UTC

All people seem to be idiots to you, aren't they?
You're just too kind with words.

Als je het over wij hebt, bedoel je ook de stemmetjes in je hoofd zeker?
Zoek een baan, langharig werkschuw tuig...

I do hope that this made you feel better. The only problem being
that where your OPs and replies made you appear juvenile, this one
pushes you into infantile behavior territory. There are a couple of
folk on DPR that post their insults in more obscure languages. It's
a strange mix of infantile and cowardly behavior, and like you, that
it harms their reputation and makes them appear foolish doesn't
concern them in the least. It also damages your credibility, since
you've now given us reason to doubt 1. that you have a sister that's
an English professor (or if she does exist, maybe she's not capable
of spotting your mistake) and 2. that the photographic "credentials"
you regularly display may be puffed up just a bit, or worse.

Dyna Soar

2009-04-15 23:15:41 UTC

Post by ASAAR
I do hope that this made you feel better. The only problem being
that where your OPs and replies made you appear juvenile, this one
pushes you into infantile behavior territory. There are a couple of
folk on DPR that post their insults in more obscure languages. It's
a strange mix of infantile and cowardly behavior, and like you, that
it harms their reputation and makes them appear foolish doesn't
concern them in the least. It also damages your credibility, since
you've now given us reason to doubt 1. that you have a sister that's
an English professor (or if she does exist, maybe she's not capable
of spotting your mistake) and 2. that the photographic "credentials"
you regularly display may be puffed up just a bit, or worse.

You know, you have more than some justification in your criticism of Focus'
comments regarding photographic matters.
However, to pick on somebody's use of English when it is obviously not his
first language only shows *you* up as an arrogant, self-centred pedant!

--
Dyna

All rights reserved. All wrongs avenged.

ASAAR

2009-04-15 23:40:49 UTC

Post by Dyna Soar
You know, you have more than some justification in your criticism of Focus'
comments regarding photographic matters.
However, to pick on somebody's use of English when it is obviously not his
first language only shows *you* up as an arrogant, self-centred pedant!

I hardly ever criticize grammatical, spelling or punctuation

Post by ASAAR
I normally wouldn't have commented on that poorly constructed
sentence, but as you followed it with one talking about "words", it
seemed to beg for someone to help you out by noting

At the time I posted this reply, Focus hadn't yet indicated that
English wasn't his primary language, which he writes well enough
anyway that one wouldn't make reasonably make that assumption. He
also said that he's *fluent* in four of eight languages, so since he
said that English is his second language, it would be reasonable to
assume that it's one of the four languages that he claims to be
fluent in. As such, your hostile reaction is misdirected and should
have been turned towards yourself. You show more than the average
amount of cluelessness, ignorance and arrogance in your
shoot-from-the-hip reply. Even if you missed some of the earlier
replies in this thread that accounts for your ignorance, fetching
them before going on the attack with a bogus insult might have
helped prevent you from appearing to share Focus's foolishness.

Dyna Soar

2009-04-16 00:11:45 UTC

Post by Dyna Soar
You know, you have more than some justification in your criticism of
Focus' comments regarding photographic matters.
However, to pick on somebody's use of English when it is obviously
not his first language only shows *you* up as an arrogant,
self-centred pedant!

I hardly ever criticize grammatical, spelling or punctuation

But you still chose to do it, didn't you, obviously just to have a cheap
shot at Focus.

Post by ASAAR
I normally wouldn't have commented on that poorly constructed
sentence, but as you followed it with one talking about "words", it
seemed to beg for someone to help you out by noting

At the time I posted this reply, Focus hadn't yet indicated that
English wasn't his primary language, which he writes well enough
anyway that one wouldn't make reasonably make that assumption. He
also said that he's *fluent* in four of eight languages, so since he
said that English is his second language, it would be reasonable to
assume that it's one of the four languages that he claims to be
fluent in. As such, your hostile reaction is misdirected and should
have been turned towards yourself.
You show more than the average
amount of cluelessness, ignorance and arrogance in your
shoot-from-the-hip reply. Even if you missed some of the earlier
replies in this thread that accounts for your ignorance, fetching
them before going on the attack with a bogus insult might have
helped prevent you from appearing to share Focus's foolishness.

I *have* followed all the thread and I find it ironic that you accuse me of
cluelessness, ignorance and arrogance, apparently because I am uninformed.
Yet it is very common knowledge in all the groups to which this thread is
posted that Focus is not from a place where English is the first language,
but you claim ignorance..

I repeat for emphasis... You *are* an arrogant, self-centred pedant, the
whole tone of your reply to me only reinforces that.observation.

I wish you a good day, now go and study your textbooks on English grammar
and sentence construction so you're ready to pick on someone else's writing
limitations..

--
Dyna

All rights reserved. All wrongs avenged.

ASAAR

2009-04-16 01:35:10 UTC

Post by ASAAR
I hardly ever criticize grammatical, spelling or punctuation

But you still chose to do it, didn't you, obviously just to have a
cheap shot at Focus.

As I also previously said, by his ill considered and foolish
posts, Focus asks for and deserves whatever ridicule he gets. It's
well earned but he's earnest (perhaps too much so) and his
contributions are occasionally useful/welcome, unlike you that
materialized out of thin air and has no contributions yet other than
your attacks. It's entirely possible that you're a new sock puppet
reviving a dormant agenda, but whether you are or aren't, it's
unlikely that you'll ever be more than an inconsequential pest.

Dyna Soar

2009-04-16 02:07:43 UTC

Post by ASAAR
I hardly ever criticize grammatical, spelling or punctuation

But you still chose to do it, didn't you, obviously just to have a
cheap shot at Focus.

"materialized out of thin air"?
I've been posting regularly to Usenet using this nick for over ten years at
least. Your not recognising it is irrelevant. Who remembers all posters?

Post by ASAAR
and has no contributions yet other than
your attacks.

Attacks? LOL. I criticised you, not for your criticism of Focus' apparent
foolish posts on matters photographic (in fact, I agreed with you). It's
still a cheap shot, though, when you sound off at another's possibly less
than perfect English skills. If pointing that out is an attack in your eyes,
so be it.

Post by ASAAR
It's entirely possible that you're a new sock puppet
reviving a dormant agenda, but whether you are or aren't, it's
unlikely that you'll ever be more than an inconsequential pest.

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, doesn't make you less of an
arrogant pedant though.

ASAAR

2009-04-16 02:41:29 UTC

Post by ASAAR
As I also previously said, by his ill considered and foolish
posts, Focus asks for and deserves whatever ridicule he gets. It's
well earned but he's earnest (perhaps too much so) and his
contributions are occasionally useful/welcome, unlike you that
materialized out of thin air

"materialized out of thin air"?
I've been posting regularly to Usenet using this nick for over ten years at
least. Your not recognising it is irrelevant. Who remembers all posters?

Usenet is quite a bit larger than this newsgroup and I relied on
my newsreader's database, not on my memory. I don't even subscribe
to all of the ones that this msg. is addressed to ("aus.photo,
rec.photo.digital, rec.photo.digital.slr-systems, and
uk.rec.photo.misc"). How long have you been posting to
rec.photo.digital? I didn't find any other messages from you going
back a good number of months. Perhaps you posted here years ago, or
perhaps more recently to other newsgroups, almost all of which I
never read?

Post by ASAAR
and has no contributions yet other than
your attacks.

Attacks? LOL. I criticised you, not for your criticism of Focus' apparent
foolish posts on matters photographic (in fact, I agreed with you).

The "?" after "Attacks" indicates that you think that what you
wrote wasn't an attack, and the "LOL" indicates that you found it
amusing. If you think that when you wrote that you think that I'm
an "arrogant, self-centred pedant!" (and repeated it in your next
reply) then there's a disconnect between you and reality.

Post by Dyna Soar
You're entitled to your opinion, of course, doesn't make you less of an
arrogant pedant though.

Ah, the third time's the charm. You have little imagination and
are stuck in a verbal rut. As Mr. T would say, I pity the fool . . .
As you didn't comment on the possibility that you may be a sock
puppet, its odds go up a bit. I await your next release of bile.

Dyna Soar

2009-04-16 03:04:44 UTC

"materialized out of thin air"?
I've been posting regularly to Usenet using this nick for over ten
years at least. Your not recognising it is irrelevant. Who remembers
all posters?

That would be obvious, I would say.

Post by ASAAR
and has no contributions yet other than
your attacks.

Attacks? LOL. I criticised you, not for your criticism of Focus'
apparent foolish posts on matters photographic (in fact, I agreed
with you).

Oh, your strange reasoning/conclusion is amusing