Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

First impression with 20D and new lenses

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 11:50:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I finally got my starting four lenses to mate up with my 20D body.

The two L lenses (17-40 and 70-200) are impressive as to build and
feel. From what I've just shot around the house the 17-40 with the
crop from the sensor is just where I thought it would be.

The 85mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.4 are doing very well for the low light use
I'd planned for them.

But people are right once you use the L lenses your are going to want
more.

More after this weekend.
*********************************************************

"I have been a witness, and these pictures are
my testimony. The events I have recorded should
not be forgotten and must not be repeated."

-James Nachtwey-
http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/

More about : impression 20d lenses

Anonymous
April 1, 2005 12:35:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Wonderful, but can you take a decent photo or do simply have more money than
sense like more 20D buyers???

"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:D kko4154sop8morockef7iu60fj38suf0d@4ax.com...
>I finally got my starting four lenses to mate up with my 20D body.
>
> The two L lenses (17-40 and 70-200) are impressive as to build and
> feel. From what I've just shot around the house the 17-40 with the
> crop from the sensor is just where I thought it would be.
>
> The 85mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.4 are doing very well for the low light use
> I'd planned for them.
>
> But people are right once you use the L lenses your are going to want
> more.
>
> More after this weekend.
> *********************************************************
>
> "I have been a witness, and these pictures are
> my testimony. The events I have recorded should
> not be forgotten and must not be repeated."
>
> -James Nachtwey-
> http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 12:35:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:KaZ2e.19335$C7.17570@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Wonderful, but can you take a decent photo or do simply have more money
> than sense like more 20D buyers???

You might have a point but I'd like you to look at this shot and judge if I
have more money than brains or perhaps might be realizing some of the
potential of a 20D and a 100-400 IS lens.

http://home.comcast.net/~charlesschuler/wsb/media/29130...
Related resources
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 12:55:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:35:54 GMT, "Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote:

>Wonderful, but can you take a decent photo or do simply have more money than
>sense like more 20D buyers???
>

I've had two one man shows in the past and have gotten these for a
book contract I have.

So I suspect, I can take better than decent photos. Sounds to me like
you don't want to what it takes to have good equipment or have a
problem with those who get the tools they need for the work at hand.
I've never used Canon before but rather Zeiss, Lecia and Nikon but
decided the 20D and Canon lenses were the way to start in digital if
one is going to do serious work.


**************************************************************

"There has always been war. War is raging throughout the world
at the present moment. And there is little reason to believe
that war will cease to exist in the future. As man has become
increasingly civilized, his means of destroying his fellow man
have become ever more efficient, cruel and devastating.
Is it possible to put an end to a form of human behavior which
has existed throughout history by means of photography?
The proportions of that notion seem ridiculously out of balance.
Yet, that very idea has motivated me.

James Nachtwey
War Photographer
http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
April 1, 2005 4:38:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Pete,

Let's see a sample of your images posted (& a list of the gear you feel
adequate) before you start casting doubt re. John's photographic ability.

Regards

DM

"Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:KaZ2e.19335$C7.17570@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Wonderful, but can you take a decent photo or do simply have more money
> than sense like more 20D buyers???
>
> "John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:D kko4154sop8morockef7iu60fj38suf0d@4ax.com...
>>I finally got my starting four lenses to mate up with my 20D body.
>>
>> The two L lenses (17-40 and 70-200) are impressive as to build and
>> feel. From what I've just shot around the house the 17-40 with the
>> crop from the sensor is just where I thought it would be.
>>
>> The 85mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.4 are doing very well for the low light use
>> I'd planned for them.
>>
>> But people are right once you use the L lenses your are going to want
>> more.
>>
>> More after this weekend.
>> *********************************************************
>>
>> "I have been a witness, and these pictures are
>> my testimony. The events I have recorded should
>> not be forgotten and must not be repeated."
>>
>> -James Nachtwey-
>> http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
>
>
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 4:38:25 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Or any other 20D owner, for that matter. In fact, any owner of any other
brand of camera. Cripes, what a low comment.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
"DM" <dungeon.master@nospam.blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4K03e.1297$G8.578@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Pete,
>
> Let's see a sample of your images posted (& a list of the gear you feel
> adequate) before you start casting doubt re. John's photographic ability.
>
> Regards
>
> DM
>
> "Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
> news:KaZ2e.19335$C7.17570@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> Wonderful, but can you take a decent photo or do simply have more money
>> than sense like more 20D buyers???
>>
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 1:03:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Pete D wrote:

> Wonderful, but can you take a decent photo or do simply have more money than
> sense like more 20D buyers???

And where are your contributions to photography posted?

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 7:20:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Geeesh, what a sour comment! Check out his credentials, then eat some
humble pie.

--
Message posted via http://www.photokb.com
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 7:40:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 22:41:38 -0800, "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net>
wrote:

>Or any other 20D owner, for that matter. In fact, any owner of any other
>brand of camera. Cripes, what a low comment.

as an aside...nice gallery there Skip
(http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

rgds
Ken
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 7:40:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Thanks! But I guess I have more money than sense, since a lot of those were
taken with a 20D! ;-)

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
"Ken Ellis" <kenellis@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:D gqq4111n1qb04l55ppqmn7amb1ka13r8o@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 22:41:38 -0800, "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Or any other 20D owner, for that matter. In fact, any owner of any other
>>brand of camera. Cripes, what a low comment.
>
> as an aside...nice gallery there Skip
> (http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
>
> rgds
> Ken
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 11:55:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Pete D wrote:
> Wonderful, but can you take a decent photo or do simply have more money than
> sense like more 20D buyers???
>

As a 20D owner with little money and even less sense, I resent that remark.

--


J

www.urbanvoyeur.com
Anonymous
April 3, 2005 6:26:21 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 15:10:17 -0800, "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net>
wrote:

>Thanks! But I guess I have more money than sense, since a lot of those were
>taken with a 20D! ;-)

Buwahaha

rgd
Ken
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 4:16:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:kjoo415pqbnhd773lf5u1t5c6s62e9veu9@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:35:54 GMT, "Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote:
>
>>Wonderful, but can you take a decent photo or do simply have more money
>>than
>>sense like more 20D buyers???
>>
>
> I've had two one man shows in the past and have gotten these for a
> book contract I have.
>
> So I suspect, I can take better than decent photos. Sounds to me like
> you don't want to what it takes to have good equipment or have a
> problem with those who get the tools they need for the work at hand.
> I've never used Canon before but rather Zeiss, Lecia and Nikon but
> decided the 20D and Canon lenses were the way to start in digital if
> one is going to do serious work.
>

You miss my point entirely as do some of the other posters here, have a look
through this group at all the people that say something similar about all
this great gear (that they don't have or have never used) and in reality
they have a Kodak and a wish list. If you are going to post how good it is
then how about a link or two to some samples. To those that wish to see some
of my work then head over to www.photographyreview.com , I used to post
there til it was taken over by wankers like some I have mentioned above,
those that bag out everyone but never actually do anything constructive.

Oh and by the way, this is a public forum so I will take it on the chin just
make sure you all do.

Cheers.

Pete D
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 4:31:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Charles Schuler" <charleschuler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:fbKdnTQxwKzbHdHfRVn-oQ@comcast.com...
>
> "Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
> news:KaZ2e.19335$C7.17570@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> Wonderful, but can you take a decent photo or do simply have more money
>> than sense like more 20D buyers???
>
> You might have a point but I'd like you to look at this shot and judge if
> I have more money than brains or perhaps might be realizing some of the
> potential of a 20D and a 100-400 IS lens.
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~charlesschuler/wsb/media/29130...

Nice shot, but see above.
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 4:31:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Sure, see above for a link. And yours would be at???

"DM" <dungeon.master@nospam.blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4K03e.1297$G8.578@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Pete,
>
> Let's see a sample of your images posted (& a list of the gear you feel
> adequate) before you start casting doubt re. John's photographic ability.
>
> Regards
>
> DM
>
> "Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
> news:KaZ2e.19335$C7.17570@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> Wonderful, but can you take a decent photo or do simply have more money
>> than sense like more 20D buyers???
>>
>> "John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:D kko4154sop8morockef7iu60fj38suf0d@4ax.com...
>>>I finally got my starting four lenses to mate up with my 20D body.
>>>
>>> The two L lenses (17-40 and 70-200) are impressive as to build and
>>> feel. From what I've just shot around the house the 17-40 with the
>>> crop from the sensor is just where I thought it would be.
>>>
>>> The 85mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.4 are doing very well for the low light use
>>> I'd planned for them.
>>>
>>> But people are right once you use the L lenses your are going to want
>>> more.
>>>
>>> More after this weekend.
>>> *********************************************************
>>>
>>> "I have been a witness, and these pictures are
>>> my testimony. The events I have recorded should
>>> not be forgotten and must not be repeated."
>>>
>>> -James Nachtwey-
>>> http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 4:33:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Boy do you Canon owners have thin skin.

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 2jkau$sp4$2@inews.gazeta.pl...
> Pete D wrote:
>
>> Wonderful, but can you take a decent photo or do simply have more money
>> than sense like more 20D buyers???
>
> And where are your contributions to photography posted?
>
> --
> -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
> -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
> -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
> -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 4:34:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

If only he had posted them Mike, he chose not to.

"Mike Pease via PhotoKB.com" <forum@PhotoKB.com> wrote in message
news:3a46bc564dba442dac3b5efe926dcb22@PhotoKB.com...
> Geeesh, what a sour comment! Check out his credentials, then eat some
> humble pie.
>
> --
> Message posted via http://www.photokb.com
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 4:36:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"UrbanVoyeur" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:424DA71E.1020804@nospam.net...
> Pete D wrote:
>> Wonderful, but can you take a decent photo or do simply have more money
>> than sense like more 20D buyers???
>>
>
> As a 20D owner with little money and even less sense, I resent that
> remark.

Of course you do, but you miss the point. Aren't you sick of all these
people that bag out everything in sight and when asked for some examples
they sort of dry up and blow away.
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 11:13:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:isa4e.23856$C7.21842@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Charles Schuler" <charleschuler@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:fbKdnTQxwKzbHdHfRVn-oQ@comcast.com...
> >
> > "Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
> > news:KaZ2e.19335$C7.17570@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >> Wonderful, but can you take a decent photo or do simply have more money
> >> than sense like more 20D buyers???
> >
> > You might have a point but I'd like you to look at this shot and judge
if
> > I have more money than brains or perhaps might be realizing some of the
> > potential of a 20D and a 100-400 IS lens.
> >
> > http://home.comcast.net/~charlesschuler/wsb/media/29130...
>
> Nice shot, but see above.
>

See above where? It seems like your closed mind can't grasp the fact that
there are a million ways to read Usenet just like it can't grasp the fact
that people may have both sense and money.

Greg
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 2:09:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:Zsa4e.23859$C7.23006@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Sure, see above for a link. And yours would be at???
>

Well, I don't know about his, but mine are at:
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/mc1.html

http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/KJ1.html

http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/Couture.html

http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/BugattiRad.html

http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/TorsoNo9.html (caution, nude)

http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/RockAndAHardPlace.h... (caution, nude)

http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/CurvesAndShadows.ht... (caution, nude)

http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/Quiet.html (caution, nude)

http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/FlowerCurves.html (caution, nude)

And, finally,

http://www.shutterspeedway.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?user...

Do I make my point? You're comment implying that 20d owners have more money
than sense, "do simply have more money than sense like more 20D buyers???"
was unwarranted. Many of us who own these cameras are competent
photographers who chose it because we have more sense than money...
By the way, some of the images on the first three links were taken by my
wife, also with a 20D.






--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 5:08:27 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Pete D <no@email.com> wrote:

> Boy do you Canon owners have thin skin.

Read the group a little and you'll discover that (a) Alan isn't a Canon
owner; and (b) Alan is someone who seems to understand that photography
isn't about what kind of camera you use.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
April 5, 2005 9:14:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

They are in his tagline (signature)


On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 12:34:05 GMT, "Pete D" <no@email.com> mumbled:

>If only he had posted them Mike, he chose not to.
>
>"Mike Pease via PhotoKB.com" <forum@PhotoKB.com> wrote in message
>news:3a46bc564dba442dac3b5efe926dcb22@PhotoKB.com...
>> Geeesh, what a sour comment! Check out his credentials, then eat some
>> humble pie.
>>
>> --
>> Message posted via http://www.photokb.com
>
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 10:51:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

To John and all the other people that have taken my post above the wrong way
(and I adnit it was not quite what I wanted to say) I apologise, but I was
merely making the comment that a lot of people are posting a lot of rubbish
and not photographing, seems to be a lot of noise without much vision.

That above said, I suggest that you all try and get a bit thicker skins,
this is a public forum you know.

http://gallery.photographyreview.com/showgallery.php?ca...

"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:D kko4154sop8morockef7iu60fj38suf0d@4ax.com...
>I finally got my starting four lenses to mate up with my 20D body.
>
> The two L lenses (17-40 and 70-200) are impressive as to build and
> feel. From what I've just shot around the house the 17-40 with the
> crop from the sensor is just where I thought it would be.
>
> The 85mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.4 are doing very well for the low light use
> I'd planned for them.
>
> But people are right once you use the L lenses your are going to want
> more.
>
> More after this weekend.
> *********************************************************
>
> "I have been a witness, and these pictures are
> my testimony. The events I have recorded should
> not be forgotten and must not be repeated."
>
> -James Nachtwey-
> http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 2:26:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Pete D wrote:

> Boy do you Canon owners have thin skin.

Not only do I not own or shoot Canon, I don't top post replies either.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 2:28:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Pete D wrote:

> Of course you do, but you miss the point. Aren't you sick of all these
> people that bag out everything in sight and when asked for some examples
> they sort of dry up and blow away.

Lets' begin with you. Where are your contributions to quality
photography? Otherwise just jump on the windtrain and head off to your
next destination.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 6:28:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Pete D wrote:
> To John and all the other people that have taken my post above the
wrong way
> (and I adnit it was not quite what I wanted to say) I apologise, but
I was
> merely making the comment that a lot of people are posting a lot of
rubbish
> and not photographing, seems to be a lot of noise without much
vision.
>
> That above said, I suggest that you all try and get a bit thicker
skins,
> this is a public forum you know.
>
>
http://gallery.photographyreview.com/showgallery.php?ca...
You were wrong and you know it, your post was insulting and in bad
taste. The tone of your post left little doubt about what you were
trying to say. Coming back and saying that people should have thicker
skins is pretty lame. As for your apology I must be missing something
because I done see it.

As for the 20D, and yes I own one, it is a great buy. The camera is
fast and takes great photos. The cost is just a few hundred dollars
more then cameras that are not nearly as capable. I generally don't
get into gear wars for the simple reason that different people have
different needs in a camera and so just because the camera that I buy
works for me does not mean it is the right camera for someone else, a
point that is all too often overlooked in these groups.

As for thick skins I am glad you have one because I got to say you are
working pretty hard at making yourself look like an idiot, but don't
take that personally.

Scott
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 7:36:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 12:16:11 GMT, in
<fea4e.23827$C7.14695@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, "Pete D"
<no@email.com> said:

>You miss my point entirely as do some of the other posters here, have a look
>through this group at all the people that say something similar about all
>this great gear (that they don't have or have never used) and in reality
>they have a Kodak and a wish list. If you are going to post how good it is
>then how about a link or two to some samples. To those that wish to see some
>of my work then head over to www.photographyreview.com

I don't see anything there with your name on it. Please post some exact
links to your work.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 7:38:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 12:31:53 GMT, in
<Zsa4e.23859$C7.23006@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, "Pete D"
<no@email.com> said:

>Sure, see above for a link. And yours would be at???

You haven't yet posted links to any of your photos, just a link to a
site. And searching that site for 'Pete D' returns nothing at all.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 7:39:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 12:36:09 GMT, in
<Zwa4e.23867$C7.6474@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, "Pete D"
<no@email.com> said:

>
>"UrbanVoyeur" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
>news:424DA71E.1020804@nospam.net...
>> Pete D wrote:
>>> Wonderful, but can you take a decent photo or do simply have more money
>>> than sense like more 20D buyers???
>>>
>>
>> As a 20D owner with little money and even less sense, I resent that
>> remark.
>
>Of course you do, but you miss the point. Aren't you sick of all these
>people that bag out everything in sight and when asked for some examples
>they sort of dry up and blow away.

You mean like you, for example?
I'm looking forward to seeing some links to *your* photos, Mr Expert.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 12:37:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 2u76u$eel$2@inews.gazeta.pl...
> Pete D wrote:
>
>> Boy do you Canon owners have thin skin.
>
> Not only do I not own or shoot Canon, I don't top post replies either.

Have you read all my posts before spouting off, I actually apologised about
4 hours before your post. Top posting, now there is something to get your
knickers in a knot about, fill your boots mate.
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 12:37:44 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Pete D wrote:


>
> Have you read all my posts before ...

No, your 'score' is so low that you're only read long after more useful
things have been read and replied to...




--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 12:40:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

No they weren't, he posted them later.

"mike" <Mikey@likes.it> wrote in message
news:6h7451l8tiq9tembv3v4pfm7pjjg9uqich@4ax.com...
> They are in his tagline (signature)
>
>
> On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 12:34:05 GMT, "Pete D" <no@email.com> mumbled:
>
>>If only he had posted them Mike, he chose not to.
>>
>>"Mike Pease via PhotoKB.com" <forum@PhotoKB.com> wrote in message
>>news:3a46bc564dba442dac3b5efe926dcb22@PhotoKB.com...
>>> Geeesh, what a sour comment! Check out his credentials, then eat some
>>> humble pie.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Message posted via http://www.photokb.com
>>
>
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 12:44:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Never did I cast doubt on gear or John, I just said that I hoped that he was
taking some decent photos and not just making noise here like it would
appear most of you guys are, oh and by the way I have posted links to photos
perhaps you just need to look, not that I have to and not that I have to
justify what I say either, umm this a public forum.

"DM" <dungeon.master@nospam.blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4K03e.1297$G8.578@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Pete,
>
> Let's see a sample of your images posted (& a list of the gear you feel
> adequate) before you start casting doubt re. John's photographic ability.
>
> Regards
>
> DM
>
> "Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
> news:KaZ2e.19335$C7.17570@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> Wonderful, but can you take a decent photo or do simply have more money
>> than sense like more 20D buyers???
>>
>> "John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:D kko4154sop8morockef7iu60fj38suf0d@4ax.com...
>>>I finally got my starting four lenses to mate up with my 20D body.
>>>
>>> The two L lenses (17-40 and 70-200) are impressive as to build and
>>> feel. From what I've just shot around the house the 17-40 with the
>>> crop from the sensor is just where I thought it would be.
>>>
>>> The 85mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.4 are doing very well for the low light use
>>> I'd planned for them.
>>>
>>> But people are right once you use the L lenses your are going to want
>>> more.
>>>
>>> More after this weekend.
>>> *********************************************************
>>>
>>> "I have been a witness, and these pictures are
>>> my testimony. The events I have recorded should
>>> not be forgotten and must not be repeated."
>>>
>>> -James Nachtwey-
>>> http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 10:43:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Oh well, get over it, I am.



>
> No, your 'score' is so low that you're only read long after more useful
> things have been read and replied to...
>
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 10:51:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Scott W" <biphoto@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1112736521.106829.228180@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Pete D wrote:
>> To John and all the other people that have taken my post above the
> wrong way
>> (and I adnit it was not quite what I wanted to say) I apologise, but
> I was
>> merely making the comment that a lot of people are posting a lot of
> rubbish
>> and not photographing, seems to be a lot of noise without much
> vision.
>>
>> That above said, I suggest that you all try and get a bit thicker
> skins,
>> this is a public forum you know.
>>
>>
> http://gallery.photographyreview.com/showgallery.php?ca...
> You were wrong and you know it, your post was insulting and in bad
> taste. The tone of your post left little doubt about what you were
> trying to say. Coming back and saying that people should have thicker
> skins is pretty lame. As for your apology I must be missing something
> because I done see it.
>
> As for the 20D, and yes I own one, it is a great buy. The camera is
> fast and takes great photos. The cost is just a few hundred dollars
> more then cameras that are not nearly as capable. I generally don't
> get into gear wars for the simple reason that different people have
> different needs in a camera and so just because the camera that I buy
> works for me does not mean it is the right camera for someone else, a
> point that is all too often overlooked in these groups.
>
> As for thick skins I am glad you have one because I got to say you are
> working pretty hard at making yourself look like an idiot, but don't
> take that personally.
>
> Scott



Yes agreed but I see that you have not posted in this thread and as such
have not taken it as a personal insult whcih of course it was never meant to
be. As for not seeing an apology, WTF do you want, please read above. An
idiot I may even be but some of the posters after me have been pretty anal,
I guess in time they will get over it.
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 1:01:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Pete D wrote:

>
> That above said, I suggest that you all try and get a bit thicker skins,
> this is a public forum you know.

Our skins are thick enough, thank you. The post you put up is typical
of troll bait, so don't be surprised when you get blasted for it, this
is a public forum you know.
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 3:19:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 06:51:16 GMT, in
<Ezq4e.577$5F3.567@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, "Pete D" <no@email.com>
said:

>To John and all the other people that have taken my post above the wrong way
>(and I adnit it was not quite what I wanted to say) I apologise, but I was
>merely making the comment that a lot of people are posting a lot of rubbish
>and not photographing, seems to be a lot of noise without much vision.
>
>That above said, I suggest that you all try and get a bit thicker skins,
>this is a public forum you know.

Mate, you've been flaming the owners of one of the most popular DSLRs on
the market today, & basically saying that most of them are clueless
gearheads with more money than talent. Did you really think that people
would just wear that kind of bullshit, & not flame you back?


--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 3:19:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <d2vda9$dom$0@pita.alt.net>, Lionel <nop@alt.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 06:51:16 GMT, in
> <Ezq4e.577$5F3.567@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, "Pete D" <no@email.com>
> said:
>
> >To John and all the other people that have taken my post above the wrong way
> >(and I adnit it was not quite what I wanted to say) I apologise, but I was
> >merely making the comment that a lot of people are posting a lot of rubbish
> >and not photographing, seems to be a lot of noise without much vision.
> >
> >That above said, I suggest that you all try and get a bit thicker skins,
> >this is a public forum you know.
>
> Mate, you've been flaming the owners of one of the most popular DSLRs on
> the market today, & basically saying that most of them are clueless
> gearheads with more money than talent. Did you really think that people
> would just wear that kind of bullshit, & not flame you back?
>
> --
> W
> . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
> \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
> ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------


yo pete. donut get in a flame war with someone with THAT .sig.
thankee.
April 6, 2005 3:19:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Lionel" <nop@alt.net> wrote in message news:D 2vda9$dom$0@pita.alt.net...
> On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 06:51:16 GMT, in
>
> Mate, you've been flaming the owners of one of the most popular DSLRs on
> the market today, & basically saying that most of them are clueless
> gearheads with more money than talent. Did you really think that people
> would just wear that kind of bullshit, & not flame you back?
>
>
> --
Odd comment Lionel...
I thought he was right on topic. Most 20D owners are pretty clueless, bought
the thing just have it run on the green square and don't even bother to load
film before they start shooting it. Now how clueless can you get?

Douglas
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 3:19:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Steve Cutchen" <maxfaq@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:050420052038193206%maxfaq@earthlink.net...
> In article <d2vda9$dom$0@pita.alt.net>, Lionel <nop@alt.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 06:51:16 GMT, in
>> <Ezq4e.577$5F3.567@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, "Pete D" <no@email.com>
>> said:
>>
>> >To John and all the other people that have taken my post above the wrong
>> >way
>> >(and I adnit it was not quite what I wanted to say) I apologise, but I
>> >was
>> >merely making the comment that a lot of people are posting a lot of
>> >rubbish
>> >and not photographing, seems to be a lot of noise without much vision.
>> >
>> >That above said, I suggest that you all try and get a bit thicker skins,
>> >this is a public forum you know.
>>
>> Mate, you've been flaming the owners of one of the most popular DSLRs on
>> the market today, & basically saying that most of them are clueless
>> gearheads with more money than talent. Did you really think that people
>> would just wear that kind of bullshit, & not flame you back?
>>
>> --
>> W
>> . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
>> \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
>> ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> yo pete. donut get in a flame war with someone with THAT .sig.
> thankee.

HAHA, LOL. Hey I'm over it.
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 3:19:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Douglas" <decipleofeos@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:QtO4e.1808$5F3.263@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Lionel" <nop@alt.net> wrote in message news:D 2vda9$dom$0@pita.alt.net...
>> On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 06:51:16 GMT, in
>>
>> Mate, you've been flaming the owners of one of the most popular DSLRs on
>> the market today, & basically saying that most of them are clueless
>> gearheads with more money than talent. Did you really think that people
>> would just wear that kind of bullshit, & not flame you back?
>>
>>
>> --
> Odd comment Lionel...
> I thought he was right on topic. Most 20D owners are pretty clueless,
> bought the thing just have it run on the green square and don't even
> bother to load film before they start shooting it. Now how clueless can
> you get?
>
> Douglas

ROFL
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 3:19:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <QtO4e.1808$5F3.263@news-server.bigpond.net.au>,
"Douglas" <decipleofeos@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I thought he was right on topic.

I suspect you are among a SMALL minority in that regard.

> Most 20D owners are pretty clueless

I must have been clueless also with my T90 and AE1 before I "went digital".

> bought the thing just have it run on the green square

Your anecdote is is noted, if unbelievable. I can't imagine ANY
point-and-shooter dropping >$1600US on dSLR to always run it on AUTO. In such
a case, that individual would most certainly have more money than brains.

Clueless, to me, would be shooting a 5-generation portrait with a camera
phone. Or, while standing in line, holding their camera phone over their head
to grab a shot of the reposed, late Pope. (Did you see that? I couldn't
believe it. A VERY-low-res shot of a dead guy. I can see that one matted-out
and hanging on the living room wall. NOT!)

> and don't even bother to load film before they start shooting it.
> Now how clueless can you get?

Now THAT's funny! Hehehehe! :) 

That's right up there with the guy on
<news:alt.rv>
that claims he gets better color using his digital camera's OEM memory card
than third-party cards! (no joke)

As for we Canon owners having THIN skin: I am mostly skeptical of that. In
any case, usenet is NO place for overly-sensitive persons. Pete has
apologized (?) quite graciously and, to his credit, never flamed anyone back
that I recall. Good show.

:) 
JR
Anonymous
April 7, 2005 12:29:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 30mjs$t1f$2@inews.gazeta.pl...
> Pete D wrote:
>
>>
>> That above said, I suggest that you all try and get a bit thicker skins,
>> this is a public forum you know.
>
> Our skins are thick enough, thank you. The post you put up is typical of
> troll bait, so don't be surprised when you get blasted for it, this is a
> public forum you know.

Hahaha, ROFL. Onya Alan.
Anonymous
April 7, 2005 3:56:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 11:19:57 +1000, Lionel <nop@alt.net> wrote:

>
>On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 06:51:16 GMT, in
><Ezq4e.577$5F3.567@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, "Pete D" <no@email.com>
>said:
>
>>To John and all the other people that have taken my post above the wrong way
>>(and I adnit it was not quite what I wanted to say) I apologise, but I was
>>merely making the comment that a lot of people are posting a lot of rubbish
>>and not photographing, seems to be a lot of noise without much vision.
>>
>>That above said, I suggest that you all try and get a bit thicker skins,
>>this is a public forum you know.
>
>Mate, you've been flaming the owners of one of the most popular DSLRs on
>the market today, & basically saying that most of them are clueless
>gearheads with more money than talent. Did you really think that people
>would just wear that kind of bullshit, & not flame you back?

How would it make them any different from the average hobbyist in
any hobby?
-Rich
Anonymous
April 7, 2005 10:18:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:vpb95115ursmv9vhksuco2noddr5if14kl@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 11:19:57 +1000, Lionel <nop@alt.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 06:51:16 GMT, in
>><Ezq4e.577$5F3.567@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, "Pete D" <no@email.com>
>>said:
>>
>>>To John and all the other people that have taken my post above the wrong
>>>way
>>>(and I adnit it was not quite what I wanted to say) I apologise, but I
>>>was
>>>merely making the comment that a lot of people are posting a lot of
>>>rubbish
>>>and not photographing, seems to be a lot of noise without much vision.
>>>
>>>That above said, I suggest that you all try and get a bit thicker skins,
>>>this is a public forum you know.
>>
>>Mate, you've been flaming the owners of one of the most popular DSLRs on
>>the market today, & basically saying that most of them are clueless
>>gearheads with more money than talent. Did you really think that people
>>would just wear that kind of bullshit, & not flame you back?
>
> How would it make them any different from the average hobbyist in
> any hobby?
> -Rich

Because they are special, LOL.
Anonymous
April 7, 2005 10:51:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 23:56:03 -0400, in
<vpb95115ursmv9vhksuco2noddr5if14kl@4ax.com>, RichA <none@none.com>
said:

>On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 11:19:57 +1000, Lionel <nop@alt.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 06:51:16 GMT, in
>><Ezq4e.577$5F3.567@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, "Pete D" <no@email.com>
>>said:
>>
>>>To John and all the other people that have taken my post above the wrong way
>>>(and I adnit it was not quite what I wanted to say) I apologise, but I was
>>>merely making the comment that a lot of people are posting a lot of rubbish
>>>and not photographing, seems to be a lot of noise without much vision.
>>>
>>>That above said, I suggest that you all try and get a bit thicker skins,
>>>this is a public forum you know.
>>
>>Mate, you've been flaming the owners of one of the most popular DSLRs on
>>the market today, & basically saying that most of them are clueless
>>gearheads with more money than talent. Did you really think that people
>>would just wear that kind of bullshit, & not flame you back?
>
>How would it make them any different from the average hobbyist in
>any hobby?

It wouldn't - that's kind of my point. ;) 

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 5:40:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <d4p4e.3434$k57.523@fed1read07>, Skip M
<shadowcatcher@cox.net> writes

>Well, I don't know about his, but mine are at:
>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/mc1.html
>
>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/KJ1.html
>
>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/Couture.html
>
>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/BugattiRad.html
>
>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/TorsoNo9.html (caution, nude)
>
>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/RockAndAHardPlace.h... (caution, nude)
>
>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/CurvesAndShadows.ht... (caution, nude)
>
>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/Quiet.html (caution, nude)
>
>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/FlowerCurves.html (caution, nude)
>
>And, finally,
>
>http://www.shutterspeedway.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?user...
>+20D+images
>
I think the photos make your point very well.

Incidentally, all the images in the "nudes" folder in the last page
showed "blocked by filter" - surprising, since I have no content filters
(horrible prissy things!) that I know of, and the 5 above showed up
fine. Is your host blocking some content?

David
--
David Littlewood
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 9:12:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"David Littlewood" <david@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:R6YuAIN8LdVCFwrm@dlittlewood.co.uk...
> In article <d4p4e.3434$k57.523@fed1read07>, Skip M <shadowcatcher@cox.net>
> writes
>
>>Well, I don't know about his, but mine are at:
>>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/mc1.html
>>
>>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/KJ1.html
>>
>>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/Couture.html
>>
>>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/BugattiRad.html
>>
>>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/TorsoNo9.html (caution, nude)
>>
>>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/RockAndAHardPlace.h... (caution, nude)
>>
>>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/CurvesAndShadows.ht... (caution, nude)
>>
>>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/Quiet.html (caution, nude)
>>
>>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/FlowerCurves.html (caution, nude)
>>
>>And, finally,
>>
>>http://www.shutterspeedway.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?user...
>>+20D+images
>>
> I think the photos make your point very well.
>
> Incidentally, all the images in the "nudes" folder in the last page showed
> "blocked by filter" - surprising, since I have no content filters
> (horrible prissy things!) that I know of, and the 5 above showed up fine.
> Is your host blocking some content?
>
> David
> --
> David Littlewood

Thank you!
Yeah, they are, you have to register to see them. I'm going to switch to
PBase for just that reason, but I haven't had time to put stuff up over
there. Too busy shooting images, don't ya know? <G>

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
!