Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 29

Thread: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

  1. #1

    Default What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    You wont see me much less remember me but i am the guy who makes you look good.

  2. #2

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    This thread should be deleted, clearly biased.

    Edit: changed fictional to biased.
    Last edited by simranjits; 14th February 2009 at 09:57 PM.

  3. #3

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Quote Originally Posted by simranjits View Post
    This thread should be deleted, clearly fictional.
    And your proof of that claim is ... ?

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Near MRT
    Posts
    12

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dream Merchant View Post
    And your proof of that claim is ... ?
    hahahae. he doesnt know luminous landscape...

  5. #5

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Quote Originally Posted by trektech View Post
    hahahae. he doesnt know luminous landscape...
    Perhaps ... oki, let me ask again, where's the irrevocable, irrefutable, substantiated cast-in-stone proof of your claim simranjits?

    Or is this just another feeble attempt to trol and bait like in other threads?

  6. #6

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Quote Originally Posted by simranjits View Post
    This thread should be deleted, clearly fictional.
    this character should be ignored, he is purely fictional.

  7. #7

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dream Merchant View Post
    Perhaps ... oki, let me ask again, where's the irrevocable, irrefutable, substantiated cast-in-stone proof of your claim simranjits?

    Or is this just another feeble attempt to trol and bait like in other threads?
    I mean we should be wary of all these editorials, could be sponsored by any one camera maker to throw another into disrepute. Etc bad QC or bad design. These are obviously cleverly engineered. We wouldn't know for sure of course . But it doesn't harm to be a bit skeptical.

  8. #8
    Member Lord Soth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Neuschwanstein Castle
    Posts
    355

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Quote Originally Posted by simranjits View Post
    I mean we should be wary of all these editorials, could be sponsored by any one camera maker to throw another into disrepute. Etc bad QC or bad design. These are obviously cleverly engineered. We wouldn't know for sure of course . But it doesn't harm to be a bit skeptical.
    Here's the gist of the online editorial.

    The Canon cameras seemed to be unable to take the extreme cold with cracked LCDs etc....

    But to be fair to Canon, there was a greater proportion of Canon users than Nikon users (mainly D700).
    | Nikon D700; AF-S 14-24 f/2.8GED; AF 20 f/2.8D; AF 50 f/1.4D; SB400| Tamron AF 28-75 f/2.8 A09NII|

  9. #9

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    haha, read this article some time back. i am a Canon user. To be fair to the "editorial", it is very clearly stated that on that trip, the majority of the cameras brought were Canons. useful for those planning a trip to the Antarctica?

  10. #10

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Quote Originally Posted by simranjits View Post
    This thread should be deleted, clearly biased.

    Edit: changed fictional to biased.
    You are aware that LL is well-known for being UNBIASED, right? That the equipment he brings along is usually paid for out of his own pocket, rather than sponsored?
    Alpha

  11. #11
    Senior Member giantcanopy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    SG
    Posts
    6,232

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Doesn't diminish my enjoyment of using the camera

  12. #12

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Unless I'm going to the Antarctica (in those weather conditions too) to take photos too, I don't really care.... Why worry so much?

  13. #13

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    You are aware that LL is well-known for being UNBIASED, right? That the equipment he brings along is usually paid for out of his own pocket, rather than sponsored?
    I'm just saying we should take it with a pinch of salt, a little bit of skepticism is always healthy. Its not a meaningful statistic by any stretch.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    990

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Quote Originally Posted by simranjits View Post
    I'm just saying we should take it with a pinch of salt, a little bit of skepticism is always healthy. Its not a meaningful statistic by any stretch.
    You contradict yourself.
    Dun blame the camera...blame the one behind the viewfinder :bsmilie:
    My Flickr..pls leave comments!

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,113

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Quote Originally Posted by tkbonz View Post
    You contradict yourself.
    +1 to the troll guy.

  16. #16

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Quote Originally Posted by simranjits View Post
    Its not a meaningful statistic by any stretch.
    He never said it was. It was a straight-up report of what worked, what didn't.
    Alpha

  17. #17

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    He never said it was. It was a straight-up report of what worked, what didn't.
    Well we should rather think about why he would post such a thing, his slant towards sony is unsettling somewhat. It could be a big PR thing for Sony instead. Recent evidence points to this , if you look at his past articles. Oh well it's just the feeling i'm getting.

  18. #18

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Quote Originally Posted by simranjits View Post
    Well we should rather think about why he would post such a thing, his slant towards sony is unsettling somewhat. It could be a big PR thing for Sony instead. Recent evidence points to this , if you look at his past articles. Oh well it's just the feeling i'm getting.
    He has ALWAYS done it for all expeditions. As for his posts about Sony, that's simply because the A900 is the camera he's currently using. And if you read a bit more, you'll see him go totally ecstatic about the 60MP Phase one back.
    Alpha

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Singapore, east-ish
    Posts
    2,291

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    I agree, skepticism is important

    Quote Originally Posted by simranjits View Post
    This thread should be deleted, clearly biased.

    Edit: changed fictional to biased.

    but is this skepticism, or denial?

  20. #20

    Default Re: What worked and what didnt. An Antartica Expedition.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    He has ALWAYS done it for all expeditions. As for his posts about Sony, that's simply because the A900 is the camera he's currently using. And if you read a bit more, you'll see him go totally ecstatic about the 60MP Phase one back.
    P65 isn't competing against the a900. His enthusiasm over the a900 is a bit not normal. Well just my feeling.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •