jcuknz Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 New York Times article of interest perhaps. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/22/technology/22lens.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&th&emc=th with interesting quotes from Nikonusa and Canonusa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wigwam jones Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 Your link broke. Hopefully this fixes it:<br /> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/22/technology/22lens.html?pagewanted=2&%20pagewanted=1&_r=2&th&emc=th">NY Times Article</a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronaldo_r Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 </p> <i>"...While Mr. Heiner said he brought an 18-200 millimeter along when he was traveling, he acknowledged that it was optically inferior to other zooms that did not attempt to span such a wide range..." </i> </p> Thanks Captain Obvious, a truly shocking revelation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcuknz Posted March 23, 2007 Author Share Posted March 23, 2007 Why is it a shocking comment ... photography is a compromise period ... if one doesn't appreciate the value of a long lens prosumer for travel snaps and have a fixation with DSLRs then obviously one uses the 18-200 .. to stick with Canon he should have taken the S3 IS. It also depends on just how much of a compromise the 18-200 is, I'm sure Canon don't sell bottle bottoms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronaldo_r Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon_hickie1 Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 JC, I think it's called sarcasm - which some say is the lowest form of wit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronaldo_r Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Actually, sarcasm is the highest form of wit. I don't see too many dumb guys using it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcuknz Posted March 24, 2007 Author Share Posted March 24, 2007 And I thought I was walking on my head here downunder :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon_hickie1 Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 According to Wikipedia (not my favourite source, but it will do), "The word comes from the late Latin word, sarcasmus, which, in turn, comes from the Greek....(sarkasmos) from....(sarkazo) - to tear flesh like dogs, - from sarx, sark-, flesh - the root word literally means "to cut a piece of flesh (from the targeted person)." Sarcasm is proverbially described as 'the lowest form of wit but the highest form of humor' (a quotation sometimes ascribed to Oscar Wilde, but untraceable)." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now