jbg

<p>Lex Jenkins, you actually guessed <strong>wrong</strong>. :) But, that is what usually happens when people are guessing for the sake of their argument. I have spent quite enough time in America and I know what I'm talking about. I've even lived in Texas for two years. I've traveled quite a bit actually all around the world and know how things have their names which should be pronounced right. Now, if you can't accept that, that's cool. I don't care how are you going to say something - whatever you say reflects on you, not me.<br /> Talking about education and culture isn't generalization - it's essential if you're going to talk about anything meaningful.</p>

<p>I'm sure you can appreciate the difference between knowing how to say something right and having different accents, pronunciations, languages, lingual expressions and what not. Right? <strong>Diversity is a good thing, but using that as an excuse for the lack of knowledge and understanding is nothing more than a flawed reasoning, I'm afraid.</strong><br /> There is the right way of saying Nikon. It isn't hard to say it the right way - lol. No matter how many countries there are in the world, how many languages people speak in Texas, whether there are aliens among us or not... company with the name "Ford" should be pronounced as "Ford" - lol.<br /> It has nothing to do with Americans nor Aliens, it has to do with common sense and education (motivation to learn).</p>

<p>Also, there's nothing ironic in understanding other cultures, Lex. It's a matter of respect and a basis for any kind of communication. That is the whole point of this debate so to speak. <strong>Respect and a possibility for communication.</strong> You can't have either if you view the world only through <em>your way</em>.<br /> If you can't take the time to learn to say my name right (for example), how can you be my friend and respect me? There can't be communication without the desire to understand and learn about "others". It's the same with poor Nikon.</p>

<p>Andrew Gilchrist, you're explaining the obvious. Of course there are all sorts of people out there: some are killers, some take themselves too seriously, some are a-holes, some are smart, some are not so smart... <em>some like to correct others every chance they have and look down on others, some don't...</em> some like to eat a lot, some like to climb mountains... What is your point here? lol</p>

<p>You're taking a hypothetical situation "what if" and arguing with that, when the whole thing is fairly simple: <strong>pronouncing something the right way is NOT pretentious per se</strong>. What some people might do or not, is completely irrelevant here, unless you think I'm one of those? Even then, there is the correct way of pronouncing "Nikon" - lol.</p>

<p>I'm not sure if you're saying, that because SOME people might take every chance to correct someone and pretend to be smart cause of it, we should all say things the wrong way? LOL You know, if some are pretentious, doesn't mean we should all stop to do the right thing in fear of not becoming one of them - LOL.</p>

<p>I don't know how to quote someone here (sorry for that).<br /> ---<br /> Andrew Gilchrist wrote: <em>"Perhaps not pretentious if you just say it that way yourself...but start correcting people about something as trivial as this will make you come across as an a-hole.</em><br /> <em>How many Americans try to pronounce Volkswagen like a German would?"</em><br /> ---<br /> I never said anything about correcting people all the time, because I'd definitely look like an a-hole. Agreed. Just that <strong>saying it right can never be pretentious</strong>. Doing something right doesn't say much about you (most of the time, when it comes to trivial things as this is, at least), unlike when you do things the wrong way - ;).</p>

<p>It's not the question "how many Americans (or I'd rather try not to pick a nation as a whole, but people in general if I may) pronounce something the right way, but rather why don't they start pronouncing things the right way?". <strong>It really isn't that hard</strong>. You just need to want to learn something the right way! Education doesn't fall from the sky just like that, sadly.<br>

<br /> I hope we agree that educating yourself to understand different cultures and things in general should be the goal. Why that doesn't happen IS the right question if you ask me.<br>

Defending the lack of knowledge can't be the way, however you put it.</p>

<p>Second option. And it's never pretentious to pronounce it <strong>the right way</strong> (@ Sanford Gerald).</p>

<p>Americans tend to pronounce things as there's no other language, in my experience. Curt Wiler is spot-on - most of the world is pronouncing it as it should be pronounced: "nee-kawn" (or "knee-con").</p>

<p>I would look at Canon S90, Panasonic LX3, or if you don't need RAW and manual controls but still very capable camera Panasonic ZS3/TZ7.</p>

<p>It really depends on your needs, but for holidays, quick trips and things like that most people like to have longer zoom, and both S90 and LX3 have limited zoom. But, in my opinion S90 and LX3 (Leica's D-Lux 4 is practically the same camera as LX3, but much expensive cause of the red dot and additional software, warranty and maybe a bit different approach in in-camera processing) are THE best small compacts at this moment. G11 is just too big, at least for my needs.</p>

<p>I personally prefer Panasonic (LX3 or ZS3/TZ7) colors and sharpness, but that's just me.</p>

<p>Leica (D-Lux 4) is great, but overpriced. LX3 gets you identical results for a lot less $.</p>

<p>My advice: <strong>Canon S90</strong>, if the price is ok for you. Size (fits even in a jeans pocket), one or if not the best IQ among compacts, decent zoom range, RAW, manual controls. You just can't go wrong with S90.</p>

<p>Pierre Lachaine was spot on when it comes to S90. I tried S90, G11, F70/200, ZS3 and LX3 (another great camera that shoots RAW) and S90 wins in almost everything, except few things you mentioned yourself J. Polk: rear control ring and that it's too small to hold easily.<br>

IQ of S90 is simply the best, plus it shoots RAW and has manual controls. G11 is as good, but it's noticeably bigger and won't fit your pocket. If size between S90 and G11 is not an issue, go for G11; but if you want a truly pocketable camera, you can't beat S90 at the moment (June 2010.).</p>

<p>Not sure if it's ok for me to post these links here, but mentioned problems (rear control ring and small size) with S90 can be solved: http://www.lensmateonline.com/ and/or http://www.kleptography.com/rf/#camera_s90 .</p>

<p>Panasonic's are known to handle low light situations badly and that was my experience too. In good light (daylight, sunny day), they are simply amazing: colors, details... I just love the general look of Panasonic ZSx line in good light. HD video is also noticeably better compared to mentioned Canon models.</p>

<p>Still, best bang for the buck is probably Fuji F70 EXR (or F200 EXR - larger, slightly better sensor, but limited zoom range).</p>

<p>And to end, look at this gallery: http://nickbland.zenfolio.com/ . That guy has produced amazing results with some of the mentioned cameras: Canon S90, Fuji F200 EXR, Panasonic LX3. You can see there how capable these "little buggers" can be in good hands.</p>

<p>Good luck.</p>

<p>If you want to spend around $200 preferably, decent low light ability and long zoom, when it comes to compact cameras I'd go for Fuji F70 EXR.<br>

It's a truly small camera that can fit your jeans or shirt pockets.</p>

<p>Canon S90 is probably the best ultra-small compact at the moment, but it's expensive compared to F70.</p>

<p>LOL, seems odd, since that's usually the first or the most important thing you should check when you're taking a photo, IMHO - selected focus point and whether it's focusing on a subject.<br>

Anyway, hopefully I'll be able to see those little buggers - lol.<br>

Thanks for the answer, <em>JDM</em> .</p>

<p>Thank you kindly, <em>Danny</em> . That's good news. It is still hard for me to grasp how would I be able to see anything, yet alone using a camera, but I truly hope it'll work for me too. I really hope that diopter adjustments are wide enough for me. Thanks.</p>

<p><em>Bill</em> , I agree that the option of being able to adjust all those parameters on a back LCD (which is much bigger and brighter) is going to make a huge difference for me. I loved having an option of a smaller top screen for quick adjustments, but I'll have to settle for the back one it seems. Not sure how badly I will see yet, but having that option is certainly a bonus. There's a viewfinder view of some of the most important settings also, but that brings me back to my original question whether I'll be able to see anything through that thing - heh.</p>

<p><em>JDM</em> , thank you for your answer. Could you explain to me what do you mean by "which focus sensors are blinking", please? Are you talking about <em>focus points</em> or? Thanks!</p>

<p>Thank you all for the help and some reassurance that I'll be able to use a DSLR again.</p>

<p>Thanks guys for quick answers.</p>

<p>I'll answer your question first <em>Stephen</em> , cause it is a logical one - lol. I actually don't have that camera any more and I forgot to remove it from my profile. Thanks for pointing that out to me. I will correct that right away. :)<br>

I do not own a camera at the moment, but am planning to get one soon - was thinking about 5D Mark II, but haven't decided yet, partly cause of this vision problem I now have.</p>

<p>I don't want to bore you with my eyesight problems here, but in the past few weeks my eyesight has deteriorated a lot (had an intervention/surgery too...) blah blah and my new diopter will be exactly what I wrote in the first mail (I'm still waiting for some swelling in my eyes to subside - my brother is writing this since I can't see much atm - lol).</p>

<p>Didn't want to bother you guys with the details about it all, honestly. Just wanted to know your experiences with high prescription glasses and viewfinders in DSLRs now days.<br>

Photography has been a passion for me and now I am a bit scared that it'll be hard for me to use a good DSLR effectively. That's all.</p>

<p>Wanted to know whether diopter adjusters for viewfinders are good enough to adjust diopter for people with somewhat higher diopters (around -11 diopter) and if there are maybe some solutions that can help with this matter.</p>

<p>My eye doctor, of course, has no idea whether I'll be able to see through viewfinder of a high-end DSLR. Believe me, I asked - lol.</p>

<p><em>Debbie</em> , I am unable to try a camera at this point (still don't have my new prescription glasses). I guess I was a bit hasty with this question. My apologies.</p>

<p><em>Alan</em> and <em>Remco</em> , thank you guys for sharing your experiences.</p>

<p>Thank you all !</p>

<p>Hello,</p>

<p>I was wondering whether someone with a bad eyesight can effectively use DSLR cameras? Of course, there are a lot of levels of bad eyesight, so I'll ask about a specific prescription and hopefully someone with <em>similar</em> vision or anyone who knows a bit more on the subject would be able to answer.</p>

<p>Right: SPH -11.00, CYL -2.50, AXIS 180<br>

Left: SPH -11.OO, CYL -3.00, AXIS 180<br>

That is a specific prescription I am talking about.</p>

<p>So, could someone with <strong>-11</strong> diopter (prescription or whatever the term is - pardon my English), or around -11 (-9 to -13 for example), use DSLR cameras normally?</p>

<p>Specifically, I'm concerned with the use of a <em><strong>viewfinder</strong> </em> with such a high prescription and my question is primary about the usage of viewfinder and NOT live view.</p>

<p>Will the image be sharp, normal... while looking through a viewfinder with such a high diopter?</p>

<p>I know there is a diopter adjusters on DSLRs but am not sure how far do they go. Any experiences with it and in general with DSLRs and high diopter prescription glasses?</p>

<p>Any info about the subject would be great.</p>

<p>Thanks a lot.</p>

<p>Ivan</p>

<p>Wonderful photos folks. This thread inspires every week.<br>

<br /> City of Rovinj, Croatia:<br>

<img src="http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/5887/rovinj5.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Nikon D90, 18-105mm @ 1/125s, f11, ISO 200</p>

<p>Heh, respect Lil Judd for the energy to include everyone in your comments. This is really a very nice place with obv lovely people and I'm glad to be a small part of it.</p>

<p>Thanks Lil again and thanks everyone for inspiration and amazing photos.</p>

<p>Wonderful photos all. I'll try to contribute to this nifty thread once more if you guys don't mind.<br>

Found these dolls left on a brick wall in one of the streets here in Belgrade. It was quite eerie and disturbing seeing them placed like that. the way they are positioned and left there and the fact that no one removed them till this day (they are still laying there today - had to check - lol)...</p>

<p><img src="http://xs842.xs.to/xs842/09343/afterb_w800345.jpg" alt="" /><br>

Nikon D90, 18-105mm @ 1/40s, f11, ISO 200</p>

<p>My cat Lila. She is a lady and she obv knows it.</p>

<p><img src="http://xs842.xs.to/xs842/09333/lila_700683.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p> Nikon D90 - 35mm f1.8 @ f1.8, 1/500s, ISO 200</p>

<p>Wonderful shot and definitely a keeper!! Especially after you fixed it a bit.<br>

From my experiences these kind of shots are the ones that stands out of the pile of usual ones and bringing most joy to people watching them.</p>