In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera - Page 3
PhotoCamel: Your friendly photo community, with free discussion forums, digital photography reviews, photo sharing, galleries, downloads, blogs, photography contests, and prizes.
 

Go Back   PhotoCamel - Your Friendly Photography Forum > PhotoCamel Lounge > Photography Talk

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-23-2017   #21
F1 Camel
 
Golem's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,791
CamelKarma: 683702
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera

Quote:
Originally Posted by Didereaux View Post
You call it bogus history which is calling me a liar. Do your homework
the New York Times REQUIRED ALL of their staff photographers to use
Nikon f2's That is fact! That can be looked up. Did the RF almost
disappear after the 1960's? YES, that is fact. So at the risk of getting
kicked off this forum I am telling you right to your face you are so full
of bullshit that you are starting to smell! and remember it was YOU
who went personal on this not me.
"Do your homework the New York Times REQUIRED
ALL of their staff photographers to use Nikon f2's
That is fact!"
- Didereaux


Bogus BS history can be riddled with facts. Homework ?
Like research ? Did you check on who lobbied whom at
the NY Times to issue such a fiat ? Thaz normal bidnez
practice. I'm not gonna research it. It doesn't hafta be
the exact detailed story for the fiat. What I'm saying is
you collaged a pile of shallow facts and offer it as solid
history and thaz sloppy ... and when it comes to history,
sloppy equals bullshidt ... handy for supporting opinion,
or for trolling, but worth nothing more.

This reply, to you who quit this thread [remember ?],
would get waaaay too loooong [again] if I address each
of your pwescious widdle factoids. But it's your overall
package that is "vituperous", shallow, shabby, etc etc.

So I'll leave it at the one example just above. Other
fantasy "facts" were well addressed earlier, in a post
that ran waaaay loooong. And I'm not going to repeat
all that ad nauseum. OTOH I could repeat just one ...
for sake of its incredible ridiculousness:

"professional photographers at the time who were
using 35mm simply tossed the range finders aside
when reliable SLR's came out."

- Didereaux


By definition, all those supposedly "tossed" 35mm
professional-use RFs are M-Leicas ... there simply
was no other make or model in use. And M-Leicas
do everything that the Nikon F cannot do ... plus
they're insanely expensive. So, uh, tossed aside ?
If you believe that, then I have some beach-front
property to sell you.
- Golem


No more silly BS will be elaborated. Enuf zenuf.
Golem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2017   #22
F1 Camel
 
gryphonslair99's Avatar
 
Location: Wichita, Kansas, USA
Posts: 3,652
CamelKarma: 1091466
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera

Quote:
Originally Posted by Didereaux View Post
You call it bogus history which is calling me a liar. Do your homework the New York Times REQUIRED ALL of their staff photographers to use Nikon f2's That is fact! That can be looked up. Did the RF almost disappear after the 1960's? YES, that is fact. So at the risk of getting kicked off this forum I am telling you right to your face you are so full of bullshit that you are starting to smell! and remember it was YOU who went personal on this not me.
New Forum, same old contentious Didereaux.


__________________
Amateurs worry about equipment, professionals worry about time, masters worry about light.

I can honestly say that there are two most remarkable men in the world today. Michio Kaku is one and I am the other one. Between us we cover all knowledge.

Kaku knows all that can be known....And I know the rest.


"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery. Today?
Today is a gift. That is why we call it the present."

Master Oogway from Kung Fu Panda
gryphonslair99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2017   #23
PhotoCamel Supporter DONATED
Administrator
 
Mr. Pickles's Avatar
 
Location: Old Folks Home
Posts: 23,276
CamelKarma: 6968994
Editing OK?: Ask First
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera

Quote:
Originally Posted by Golem View Post
Really ? You're wondering ? Or just being polite !
No, I was wondering what camera to what camera.... I have been "in to" mirrorless for a LONG time, and I can see what some people try to claim is inferior about it, but it isn't so one sided and clear. Mirrorless in todays world is evolving and can't do some things that DSLRs (mostly the higher end ones now) can do.... BUT, the Mirrorless cameras can do things that DSLRs can't do.

It all depends. Mirrorless vs DSLR is in a lot of ways the same as RAW vs JPG, or Canon vs Nikon, Prime vs Zoom, and so forth. An argument waiting to happen, when in reality, neither side is the best at all. So yeah, it does boil down to opinions and how bad one person opinion expresses their desire to think they are the best, or holding the best, or doing it the best.
__________________
Olympus Full-time User
Olympus Passion Magazine
Idiot Savant AND trouble-maker...

PhotoCamel Helpful Info....
Posting Images Tutorial ... Posting and Critiquing? ... What's Camel Karma?
Mr. Pickles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2017   #24
F1 Camel
 
Golem's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,791
CamelKarma: 683702
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Pickles View Post
No, I was wondering what camera to what camera
.............

Mirrorless in todays world is evolving and can't do
some things that DSLRs (mostly the higher end ones
now) can do.... BUT, the Mirrorless cameras can do
things that DSLRs can't do.

.............
Things that one system or the other can or cannot do,
can or cannot perform, are just operational behaviors.

IOW some live view cameras can do soundless operation,
but SLRs cannot do the same. Thaz an example of what
I mean by "operational behaviors". If those operational
differences are what you mean by "can do" and "cannot
do", no one could argue otherwise. Operationally, each
system can do things the other system cannot do. Each
system has certain behaviors that the other system can
not duplicate.

But if "can do" and "cannot do" means can or cannot do
any particular job, thaz unsupportable. Any particular
job that either system can handle, the other system can
also handle. Those differences in "operational behaviors"
often create differences in efficiency or convenience,
but either system is capable of handling all the jobs that
the "opposing" system can handle.

If the difference in convenience is large, then one system
may require a more experienced user ... causing the less
experienced user too feel that ONLY the more convenient
system could do the job ... that the job is NOT do-able by
one of the two systems. That would be conflating system
capabilities with users' abilities, which leads to unsound
conclusions.

---------------------------------------------------------

I can't use a smartphone camera to save my life, and I'm
a career photographer ... therefor, the shots I make with
"real" cameras are shots that phones CANNOT make ? We
all know that this is seldom the fact. Differences ? Surely.
But those dinky little phone cameras can do a big chunk
of what was once only for "real" cameras. Phones are at
a rather larger difference vs "real cameras" than SLRs vs
Live-View cameras. The more capable models of SLR and
Live-View are able to do ALL of each other's jobs, despite
their large and small operational differences. And lately,
the most capable phones are "nipping at their heels".
Golem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2017   #25
F1 Camel
 
Golem's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,791
CamelKarma: 683702
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera

`

Quote:
Originally Posted by gryphonslair99 View Post
New Forum, same old contentious Didereaux.
Not my style to be waving the flag about my
career, expertise, or whatever ... tho they be
kinda substantial. BUT, if it helps to stuff the
troll back under bridge, I'll let fly !

No claim to being some kinda expert's expert
who is never ever mistaken, about everything.
But I do have more than sufficient "Ben Dare
Don Dat" points for addressing BS artistes.

----------------------------------------------

It's not as if everybody hasta know all the
details of their field of interest simply to be
aware that BS is flying at them. BS artistry
is most easily noticed not thru our personal
knowledge of facts or detail. BS artistry can
be most readily detected just by its BS style
of delivery. A BS'er sounds like a BS'er even
if you aren't up on all the fact yourself. IOW
you don't need a degree in biology to know
when something simply smells rotten. Not
everyone can name the microbes that make
shit stink ... but everyone knows that smell !
Golem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2017   #26
F1 Camel
 
Golem's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,791
CamelKarma: 683702
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera

Quote:
Originally Posted by Didereaux View Post
You call it bogus history which is calling me a liar.
Do your homework the New York Times REQUIRED
ALL of their staff photographers to use Nikon f2's
That is fact! That can be looked up. Did the RF
almost disappear after the 1960's? YES, that is fact. .......
Facts ? ROTFLMFAO. "Can be looked up" ? Where
are your linkies ? Forgot to include them ? Left us
on our own to google "NY Times Nikon F2" ? OK.
Ben Dare, Don Dat. Very top hit was ....

CAMERA - NYTimes.com

Check it out. Verrrry innnerressin ! For those who'd
rather not click any links, here are the opening two
sentences from there:

"I'm old enough to remember when Nikon replaced
the original Nikon F camera with the Nikon F2. Pros
screamed, yelled and vowed never to change their
equipment."
- Andy Grundberg, NY Times 1989.


Soooo .... did I mention yesterday that the working
photographers "welcomed" the F2 by SHUNNING it ?
And is that a fact, that you can "look up" ? You can
click the link. Or you can google:

" NY Times 1989 andy grundberg nikon f2 ".

But if you broaden the search to simply:

" NY Times nikon f2 "

You just land in the same place as the above. What
you will NOT find is anything about mandatory use
of the F2 at the NY Times. "Can look it up" ? Maybe
didereaux will finally post some links. Or maybe not.
Golem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2017   #27
Dromedary
 
Didereaux's Avatar
 
Location: swamplands of East Texas
Posts: 1,059
CamelKarma: 1543000
Editing OK?: Ask First
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default ADMINS: PLease CLOSE THIS THREAD!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Golem View Post
Facts ? ROTFLMFAO. "Can be looked up" ? Where
are your linkies ? Forgot to include them ? Left us
on our own to google "NY Times Nikon F2" ? OK.
Ben Dare, Don Dat. Very top hit was ....

CAMERA - NYTimes.com

Check it out. Verrrry innnerressin ! For those who
rather not click links ... here are the opening two
sentences there:

"I'm old enough to remember when Nikon replaced
the original Nikon F camera with the Nikon F2. Pros
screamed, yelled and vowed never to change their
equipment."
- Andy Grundberg, NY Times 1989.


Soooo .... did I mention yesterday that the working
photographers "welcomed" the F2 by SHUNNING it ?
And is that a fact, that you can "look up" ? You can
click the link. Or you can google:

" NY Times 1989 andy grundberg nikon f2 ".

But if you broaden the search to simply:

" NY Times nikon f2 "

You just land in the same place as the above. What
you will NOT find is anything about mandatory use
of the F2 at the NY Times. "Can look it up" ? Maybe
didereaux will finally post some links. Or maybe not.
Okay folks, it ooks like the admins are going to let this A$$hole continue his personal attacks sooooo Please do look at his NYT link. It says that the pros didn't want to change from F to F2 How does that contradict what I wrote in the OP? It doesn't. They weren't protesting the dropping of the RF cameras, they were simply protesting changing SLR'!

I have F&*(ing had it with jacka$$es and the only question to be asked about this one is this: Is he a jacka$$ by choice or genetics.

ADMINS PLEASE CLOSE THIS THREAD
Didereaux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2017   #28
F1 Camel
 
gryphonslair99's Avatar
 
Location: Wichita, Kansas, USA
Posts: 3,652
CamelKarma: 1091466
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera

Never let facts get in the way of a good argument. It might work if you were the only one old enough to have been shooting then, but your not.
__________________
Amateurs worry about equipment, professionals worry about time, masters worry about light.

I can honestly say that there are two most remarkable men in the world today. Michio Kaku is one and I am the other one. Between us we cover all knowledge.

Kaku knows all that can be known....And I know the rest.


"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery. Today?
Today is a gift. That is why we call it the present."

Master Oogway from Kung Fu Panda
gryphonslair99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2017   #29
F1 Camel
 
palters's Avatar
 
Location: The Land of Ahs....
Posts: 2,855
CamelKarma: 5883836
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera

Phooey, and all this time I thought my 110 drop in cartridge camera was top of the line back in the 60's. And of course those auto rotating flashcubes were the bomb!!
palters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2017   #30
F1 Camel
 
gryphonslair99's Avatar
 
Location: Wichita, Kansas, USA
Posts: 3,652
CamelKarma: 1091466
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera

Quote:
Originally Posted by palters View Post
Phooey, and all this time I thought my 110 drop in cartridge camera was top of the line back in the 60's. And of course those auto rotating flashcubes were the bomb!!
I have a couple of boxes of the flash cubes if you would like them. Apparently I didn't get the e-mail that I was supposed to throw them in the trash. Good thing to otherwise I might have thrown my Leica M3 in the trash along with my Yashica 35. Come to think of it, I still have my 110 somewhere. Best of all I still have my moms Talking Minolta. That was a classic. Forget to pop the flash up and in a pre siri like voice it would state, "To dark, use flash." Forget the film and you would get, "Load Film."

Thing still works.


__________________
Members don't see ads in threads. Register for your free account today and become a member of PhotoCamel to open up the site's many benefits and features.
__________________
Amateurs worry about equipment, professionals worry about time, masters worry about light.

I can honestly say that there are two most remarkable men in the world today. Michio Kaku is one and I am the other one. Between us we cover all knowledge.

Kaku knows all that can be known....And I know the rest.


"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery. Today?
Today is a gift. That is why we call it the present."

Master Oogway from Kung Fu Panda
gryphonslair99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

« PhotoCamel - Your Friendly Photography Forum > PhotoCamel Lounge > Photography Talk »


Share this topic:

Thread Tools
Display Modes