|
|
Forums:
Climbing Disciplines:
Climbing Photography:
Re: [merock] First DSLR:
Edit Log
|
|
cam
Nov 27, 2006, 5:21 AM
Views: 4449
Registered: Apr 4, 2004
Posts: 219
|
merock wrote: just trying to see if the person that has diarrhea of the mouth has good work to back it up. At least then I might consider what you were saying to have some validity.
So, if my work blows, then I'm wrong. If it's good, then I'm slightly less that wrong? And you called MY logic into question?
merock wrote: I still think brand bashing is lame.
As do I. So, I'll say it again...I wasn't bashing. At no point did I say that any brand sucks. I'm just saying that I think one is better than the rest. You know what else is lame? Using the word "lame". Also, the word "Uber". Both are uber lame. I know you didn't use "Uber" at all, but I did take note of your repeated use of the word "lame". You must be a boulderer, no?
cam wrote: I'm saying "Canon works for the majority" so you should consider that." I'm looking at the bigger picture.
merock wrote: You didn't say (like I did) that you should also consider Canon, you said "Go with Canon".
*sigh* Well, since we're taking things so literally 'round here these days I'll re-phrase that...I think that Canon should be considered as a viable alternative amonst other, such esteemed choices. There, how's that?
cam wrote: So if someone can point me to a Nikon hosted image of a white Nikon lens...I'll eat my words.
merock wrote: I think he's talking about the import version: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/largeimages/278173.jpg
Well, lookity loo. Words eaten.
It's been nice fishing with you, merock. There's always a biter in every thread. Well, the weekends over. Back to reality.
(This post was edited by cam on Nov 27, 2006, 4:59 PM)
|
|
|
Edit Log:
|
|
Post edited by cam
() on Nov 27, 2006, 4:58 PM
|
|
Post edited by cam
() on Nov 27, 2006, 4:59 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
