Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: here we go again  (Read 13245 times)

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9350
here we go again
« Reply #20 on: May 23, 2008, 02:28:22 PM »

Quote
If the guy bugs you so much, just ignore him.  You'll never see the posts, and I doubt you'd miss much.

Just click on his user name, then click "ignore user" in the profile screen.  Out of sight, out of mind.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197559\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


The guy who bugs you is the guy you should listen to. You turn him off to your own disadvantage. You don't think by ignoring me that I cringe, do you? Makes no difference to me if you ignore me.
Logged

Dansk

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 151
here we go again
« Reply #21 on: May 23, 2008, 02:34:57 PM »

agreed this guy is annoying and is a thread wrecker
Logged

Mort54

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 590
    • http://
here we go again
« Reply #22 on: May 23, 2008, 02:46:42 PM »

Quote
If you want a meaningful discussion, I'm the guy.
Ray, when you preface your comment with "You people are so precious, it's unbelievable", it suggests the last thing you want is a meaningful discussion. It suggests, to me at least, that you're trying to goad or provoke.

I'm not entirely unsympathetic with some of your views. DSLR IQ is getting incredibly good, and the latest ones are certainly stiff competition for lower res MFDBs. Few here would disagree with that. But what point you are trying to make beyond that eludes me.

I shoot with both a D3 and a P45. They serve different purposes, and each in their own way excels. If I'm shooting low light stuff, or stuff that I don't plan to print all that big, I'd much rather use the D3. If I'm shooting landscapes, or architecture, I'd much rather use the P45. I would be thrilled if I could get the same image quality out of a DSLR that I get from a back, given the better ergonomics and size and weight and price of a DSLR, but sadly that isn't the case today. If that day ever comes, I'll gladly ditch the back.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2008, 02:51:08 PM by Mort54 »
Logged
I Reject Your Reality And Substitute My Own

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9350
here we go again
« Reply #23 on: May 23, 2008, 03:12:36 PM »

Quote
Ray, when you preface your comment with "You people are so precious, it's unbelievable", it suggests the last thing you want is a meaningful discussion. It suggests, to me at least, that you're trying to goad or provoke.

I'm not entirely unsympathetic with some of your views. DSLR IQ is getting incredibly good, and the latest ones are certainly stiff competition for lower res MFDBs. Few here would disagree with that. But what point you are trying to make beyond that eludes me.

I shoot with both a D3 and a P45. They serve different purposes, and each in their own way excels. If I'm shooting low light stuff, or stuff that I don't plan to print all that big, I'd much rather use the D3. If I'm shooting landscapes, or architecture, I'd much rather use the P45. I would be thrilled if I could get the same image quality out of a DSLR that I get from a back, given the better ergonomics and size and weight and price of a DSLR, but sadly that isn't the case today. If that day ever comes, I'll gladly ditch the back.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197568\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Mort54,
You haven't read my posts. I understand that MFDB has an image quality advantage at base ISO. It's ideal for the studio where sharp eyelashes and creamy skin texture is the goal. Photographers who use DBs don't have to bother with 'expose to the right' rules. They've got oodles of dynamic range to spare.

Nevertheless, I'd like to see some comparisons at various ISO's, just so I can get a handle on the magnitude of the difference.

Alas! This is to be denied because the consensus is, I should test this for myself even though I have no access to the equipment.
Logged

elitegroup

  • Guest
here we go again
« Reply #24 on: May 23, 2008, 03:41:31 PM »

Quote
If the guy bugs you so much, just ignore him.  You'll never see the posts, and I doubt you'd miss much.

Just click on his user name, then click "ignore user" in the profile screen.  Out of sight, out of mind.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197559\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I didn't know you could do that  
Logged

marcwilson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 411
    • http://www.marcwilson.co.uk
here we go again
« Reply #25 on: May 23, 2008, 03:44:39 PM »

Quote
...Alas! This is to be denied because the consensus is, I should test this for myself even though I have no access to the equipment.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197574\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


err...make the effort to rent it...test it yourself for your needs...then you'll know...pretty simple really...

EricWHiss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2547
    • Rolleiflex USA
here we go again
« Reply #26 on: May 23, 2008, 03:46:30 PM »

I have ignored him since at least a year when he was so persistently and fervently posted off track and annoying posts on my MF silly ETTR thread awhile back.

Part of the problem with just Ignoring Ray is that so many members who are not ignoring him get sucked into the vortex and respond to this troll's inane posts and incessant challenges to prove MF is better that whatever.  Ray just keeps pulling/pushing until the thread is unraveled and people are fighting and way off track.  That's the problem - nice, polite people get caught feeding this troll.
Logged
Authorized Rolleiflex Dealer:
Find product information, download user manuals, or purchase online - Rolleiflex USA

Mort54

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 590
    • http://
here we go again
« Reply #27 on: May 23, 2008, 04:00:05 PM »

Quote
You haven't read my posts. I understand that MFDB has an image quality advantage at base ISO. It's ideal for the studio where sharp eyelashes and creamy skin texture is the goal. Photographers who use DBs don't have to bother with 'expose to the right' rules. They've got oodles of dynamic range to spare.
Actually, Ray, I have read your posts. I was just responding to certain parts of them that people seem to find most annoying. I didn't say (or at least I didn't mean to say) that you don't see the benefits of MFDBs. Instead, I was trying to suggest that there are a whole host of reasons why people use MFDBs. Your suggestions that people are buying them as status symbols is way too simplistic and insulting, and really, what purpose do such comments serve. Your suggestion that MFDB owners are somehow living in fear of DSLR improvements is also way too simplistic and insulting. People on this forum are, by and large, smart people. They are perfectly capable of making their own assessments of the state of technology, and what works for them. They don't need someone who isn't familiar with their business needs telling them how to think, or needling them on their choices.

Quote
Nevertheless, I'd like to see some comparisons at various ISO's, just so I can get a handle on the magnitude of the difference.

Alas! This is to be denied because the consensus is, I should test this for myself even though I have no access to the equipment.
As for ISO comparisons, I won't even bother. I accept the fact that my P45+ isn't in the same league as my D3. I personally don't shoot the P45+ over ISO 200. I typically shoot at ISO 50 or 100. I knew that limitation going in. Some people here are showing pretty good DB results up to ISO 800, but for me at least, with the smaller photo sites of the P45+, and no microlenses, I'll stay at the lower ISOs, thank you. But I guess I have to ask "What's the point of debating this?" Who's going to willingly use a MFDB system in low light, high ISO venues when a modern DSLR would be much more appropriate. People who buy MFDBs aren't buying them for their high ISO prowess. So to my mind the comparison is pointless.

Regarding resolution or accuity, I have done my own side by side comparisons between the D3 and the P45+, with different focal length lenses so that I'm compariing the same resolutions (i.e. same pixel density on the same subject). The D3 pixels (and no doubt the 5D, and 1DIII, and 1DsII pixels) are excellent, and a lot of detail can be pulled from the shadows. But even in such comparisons, the P45+ pixels are better (the P25+ or P30+ pixels may be even better still). Not hugely better, but still better. Maybe it's the lack of AA filter. Or maybe it's due to some of the more intangible advantages that people often claim for MFDBs. I only know what I see. But this is a somewhat unfare comparison. It deliberately brings the P45+ down to the D3s level. If I'm standing at the same place with both systems, and shoot the same landscape composition, there's no doubt which one is better (I realize you understand this, but I'm making the point for completeness).

So, Ray, if you want to play the gadfly on this forum, more power to you. Being a gadfly can be an honorable and thought provoking activity. But it seems to me there is a right way to do that, and a wrong way. Repeatedly making comments that seem more geared to inflame than clarify seems to me to be the wrong way. Of course, that's just my opinion. By the way, even if you don't feel that you are making inflamatory comments, you have to agree that many on this forum feel you do. So isn't that reason enough to rethink your approach.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2008, 04:05:52 PM by Mort54 »
Logged
I Reject Your Reality And Substitute My Own

woof75

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 581
here we go again
« Reply #28 on: May 23, 2008, 04:59:56 PM »

I was the one who suggested a pro forum but it was rejected by most and really thinking about it I agree, good etiquette is all that is required but when someone won't abide by that etiquette and he has been asked to do so then it is time for the moderator to step in.
I mean come on, even this thread is being diverted now, it's starting to get silly and it's pretty much from the actions of one individual.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2008, 05:01:50 PM by woof75 »
Logged

203

  • Guest
here we go again
« Reply #29 on: May 23, 2008, 05:14:27 PM »

Ray, here is a test which Mark Tucker (who I believe fled this board due to idiotic posts) conducted some time ago, comparing the H1 (don't remember which back - I think it was a 22 mp Phase) with the 1Ds2 and the 5D. He resized the Canons up to the Hi file size, and these are 100% crops:

http://www.pcguide.com/pers/H1_1DS2_5D_ver2.jpg
Logged

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3455
    • waynefox.com
here we go again
« Reply #30 on: May 23, 2008, 06:02:56 PM »

Amazing ... another thread in the MF section that has evolved to MF vs DSLR.

Fritzer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 211
here we go again
« Reply #31 on: May 23, 2008, 06:57:21 PM »

Quote
Amazing ... another thread in the MF section that has evolved to MF vs DSLR.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197602\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Which suggests the OP has a valid point  .
The ignore button will only help if everyone is using it.
Logged

Moynihan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 118
    • http://www.jaymoynihan.com
here we go again
« Reply #32 on: May 23, 2008, 07:09:07 PM »

Wow, what a cool feature, the ignore button. Wish DPreview had one  
Thanks for pointing it out
Logged

Gigi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 465
    • some work
here we go again
« Reply #33 on: May 23, 2008, 07:12:21 PM »

Quote
Wow, what a cool feature, the ignore button. Wish DPreview had one.
Thanks for pointing it out
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197608\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Agreed. Great stuff. Thanks, Michael.
Logged
Geoff

fpoole

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 53
    • http://www.frankpoole.com
here we go again
« Reply #34 on: May 23, 2008, 07:42:23 PM »

Thank you everyone for pointing out the ignore button!!!
Didn't know it was there either.

Best,
Frank Poole
www.frankpoole.com

dilip

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 60
here we go again
« Reply #35 on: May 23, 2008, 07:54:09 PM »

Quote
Wow, what a cool feature, the ignore button. Wish DPreview had one   
Thanks for pointing it out
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197608\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yeah, but after ignoring everyone on DPReview who is annoying, there would be an incredibly low number of posts per day, rendering it pretty much of no use...
 
Logged

Andy M

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 333
    • http://
here we go again
« Reply #36 on: May 24, 2008, 03:27:27 AM »

Quote
The Ignore button is SWEEEEET!

The MFDB forum will rebirth from its use.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197604\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Now, if people would stop quoting him, we'll never have need to read his inane drivel again
Logged

Mort54

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 590
    • http://
here we go again
« Reply #37 on: May 24, 2008, 05:54:53 PM »

Quote
Now, if people would stop quoting him, we'll never have need to read his inane drivel again
He apologized in a different thread, so I say let bygones be bygones.
Logged
I Reject Your Reality And Substitute My Own

Andy M

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 333
    • http://
here we go again
« Reply #38 on: May 25, 2008, 04:21:14 AM »

Quote
He apologized in a different thread, so I say let bygones be bygones.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197771\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Glad to hear it, but I'm going to keep him 'blocked' as I value my sanity

Live, and let live...
Logged

CJL

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 96
    • http://www.imageswest.ca
here we go again
« Reply #39 on: May 25, 2008, 03:58:35 PM »

Funny... as soon as I read the first post in this thread, I knew it was about Ray.  Thanks for the tip on the "ignore" button!  
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up