Drivin' me buggy

[josephwalsh]

<p>These nits are getting to me so I'm gonna pick 'em.</p>

<p>There is no "h" in "Voigtlander."</p>

<p>The singular of "lenses" is not "lense."<br /> One lens = one "e"<br /> Two lenses = 2 "e"s</p>

<p>Only one "a" in "aperture."</p>

<p>There's no period after "f" It's a symbol, not an abbreviation.</p>

<p>It's not a "close up filter" It's a "close up lens." Yeah, it looks like a filter but...<br /> Filters are flat and block light. Lenses are curved and bend it.</p>

<p>I didn't get my nap and I'm cranky.<br /> Whew...now I feel better...thanks.<br /> Joe</p>

<p>addendum: meanwhile, back at the Department of Irony: When I submitted this I wrote "aperture" with an extra "a" between the R and T by way of example. Photo.net bounced it back to me advising "there's only one "a" in aperture!</p>

[Leonard-just-Leonard]

<p>seek professional help ;)</p>

[josephwalsh]

<p>You're probably right, L.J.<br>

Or a nap.</p>

 

[john tonai]

<p>But I want to know if it's alright to use a close up filter on my Voightlander lense. I was told that it is an f.8 aperature.</p>

[josephwalsh]

<p>John, you may do as you wish...no one will know...we have been moved to the boondocks, aka "Casual Photo Conversations." :-)</p>

[User_276104]

<p>You know what got on my nerves for awhile? When lenses were rampantly referred to as "samples" and/or "copies", along with use of "sample variation".</p>

<p>I know it's grammatically correct, but it was EVERYWHERE on photo.net for awhile, and not so much on a couple of other forums I check in on. It seems to have died down now...at least until I brought it up again.</p>

[commtrd]

<p>What bugs me? Endless repetitive questions about "Which lens should I buy" from those who will not do even a modicum of research on their own and look at their own photography to see what focal ranges they tend to gravitate towards using over time etc.</p>

[ian_tindale]

<p>Meanwhile, back in the 21st century:<br>

"scandisk" </p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>1/4 anon.<br>

Originality = 1. This complaint is so old it dates back to the origins of photo.net's original "Bozo filters" of the 1990s, intended to screen out the most infuriating types of spelling mistakes. Also, the same complaint is recycled about once a month.<br>

Aesthetics = 4. It's still good for a laugh.</p>

[joseph_leotta]

<p>i just curius. you shot cannon or nikkon kameras</p>

[samn]

<p>This thread should be shot with a 35mm.</p>

[jason_hall5]

<p >>>>>  "You know what got on my nerves for awhile? When lenses were rampantly referred to as "samples" and/or "copies", along with use of "sample variation".</p>

<p >I know it's grammatically correct, but it was EVERYWHERE on photo.net for awhile, and not so much on a couple of other forums I check in on."  <<<<</p>

<p > </p>

<p >More proof that it was mostly a load of crap making people think that the lens was the reason that they could not get a sharp photo.  I bet the terminology could be traced to one or two web sites by some.... well I will just leave that alone.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Out of the hundreds of threads on the EOS forum on that very same subject, I only saw one that really did have proof and found that he really did have a "bad" lens that would not focus.  It was a 24-105f4L.  I am sure some of the other may have had a "real" problem, but could never show true results.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >My very humble and sincere apologies to the OP if I misspelled anything.  :o)</p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Jason</p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

[josephwalsh]

<p>I admit this is a lame thread although, unlike Lex, I've not seen these complaints before.<br>

Meanwhile, there's a gripping thread over on the Nikon Forum that may be of interest:<br>

"50mm lens: 1.8 or 1.4?"</p>

<p>btw Lex, first time I saw Voigtlander with an "H" was at Harry Ransom.</p>

[AJHingel]

<p>.. and the plural of forum is fora and never forums. </p>

[daverhaas]

<p>The annoying voiceover talent (or lack thereof) on the local camera store's radio spots that insist on calling Nikon - "Nee-Cone" and Canon "Can - Non" . As in "Now on sale the newest Nee Cone D40 with 18-55 VR Lines"</p>

<p>One can only imagine how they'd do on Olympus or Panasonic.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[karenf]

<p>So if there are only 7 basic stories in the world, how many distinct PN threads are there, Lex? I do enjoy the cranky pedantic ones. <br>

<em>"50mm lens: 1.8 or 1.4?"</em>. Hmmm.....I was just wondering about that. Thanks Joe.</p>

 

[michaelyoung]

<p>Both the O.E.D. and The American Heritage Dictionary place "forums" ahead of "fora."<br>

The O.E.D. also records uses of "forums" long before "fora" came along.<br>

Both seem to reserve "fora" for the precise context of describing ancient Roman public meeting spaces.<br>

Just sayin. Don't really care one way or the other.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>I quit worrying about other people's spelling errors after my college journalism class presented what was intended to be a clever plaque to our instructor. We'd misspelled "appossitive" and none of us noticed it.</p>

[seismiccwave]

<p>Let's get back to pictograms. We can still interpret the ancient civilizations that used pictogram. How are those future civilizations translate the gobbledygook that we write without a dictionary?\<br>

BTW David, Nikon is better pronounced as "Neekon" than "Nyekon". ;-)</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>The problem with pictograms is that one misplaced squiggle can transform an ordinary shopping list into an order to attack the Moabites.</p>

[ian_tindale]

<p>So, for most people the phrase "loose your mind" isn't analogous to "free your mind"?<br /> I'm surprised at the sheer range of cameras that you can apparently fit 120mm film into.</p>

[steve_levine]

<p>I used to be apathetic, but I slowly learned not to care.</p>

[steve m smith]

<p>Just to add:</p>

<p>It's <em>lose</em> , not <em>loose</em> (unless it really is loose).<br /> It's <em>a lot</em> , not <em>alot</em> or <em>allot.</em> <br /> And it's <em>I couldn't care less</em> , not <em>I could care less</em> .</p>

<p> </p>

[otto_fechner]

<p>But hey - there is no "a" in "Voigtländer".</p>

[matt_needham]

<p><em>The singular of "lenses" is not "lense."</em><br>

<em>-<br /> </em><br>

You better let them know at Princeton University.<br>

<a href="http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=lense&sub=Search+WordNet&o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&h="><br /> http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=lense&sub=Search+WordNet&o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&h=</a></p>