DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Regarding Contax N digital and Leica digital back

Richard, For the record, I happen to agree with your assessment. I'm rather disenchanted with the way things stand. I like to make up my own mind about worth and value and not have it made for me. There was something decidedly unfair that went on here. As an aside, you share a profession with my ex-boyfriend, and I feel that if he had read this thread he would have uttered the word libel. -Lynn
 
So, from posts up to this point, only Austin thinks all of these are fair, and starts to act as if he were the umpire.
 
Austin, just curious, do you really believe this forum needs a Lone Ranger to rescue all the ignorant photographers from any OPINION you disagree with? (I say OPINION as opposed to fact, because anyone who takes anything for face value on the web without cross checking the information with a number of known sources is a fool).

If so, would it be possible to provide less fat and more meat? Half of your posts are line by line puffery in defense of you and the dismissal of others . It would be lovely if you could just state your opinion on the subject and leave us to decide the merits of each different arguement.

Thanks for any consideration in future.
 
Shu-Hsien,

> So, from posts up to this point, only Austin thinks all of these are > fair

I have not said a thing about fair or not, but the FACT is, Dirk said to stop the personal attacks, and Finney didn't, period. That is why Finney got the boot.

>, and starts to act as if he were the umpire.

Where did I act as if I was the umpire? Why on earth do you want to keep this going, even after I request you leave me out of this. I had nothing to do with Finney's getting expelled, period. Why you do not get that.

Is your goal to have this entire thread wiped out by Dirk, and this is why you keep going on about it?

I really think YOU should go read the posts. From what I can tell, what you BELIEVE happened is NOT what happened. To quote from my posts prior to Finney "joining":

In response to him being an "IT Professional": "I'm not sure why that caries any credence to his/her statements..." Hardly demeaning.

"Thanks for his background, but still, that, IMO, doesn't carry much weight..." "Possibly, but I think that he might be missing some understanding..." I am clearly stating MY opinion, and again, where am I being demeaning here?

It was Finney who started with the personal attacks/demeaning statements in his very first post:

"Very interesting, other than Contax Mailing list, now you are trying to grow some believers here, hum?" "You still haven't learned, have you?" "you do not have to pretend that you know a lot."

That is Finney's FIRST post. So, how am I in the "wrong" here? Even a post from Mike Nunan ADDRESSED TO Finney, after his first posts:

"Hi Finney, 1. Please avoid entering into a flame war on this board..."

And, after I respond to Finney's attacks, without ONE personal attack at all he comes back:

"I will ignore you for now."

Who is it that is being dismissive here?

I STRONGLY suggest you go read the link:

> Use this link to go directly to the discussion: > http://www.contaxinfo.com/discus/show.cgi?14047/111652

As a note, Finney's last post that got him booted has been deleted, so you will not see that, but you can clearly see what led up to it, and who did/said what.

Austin
 
Marc,

> Austin, just curious, do you really believe this forum needs a Lone > Ranger to rescue all the ignorant photographers from any OPINION you > disagree with?

That is very unfair Marc. Of course I don't believe that. It is not really opinion I care about, and I've said that countless times. It is opinion claimed as fact that I have had issue with here.

> If so, would it be possible to provide less fat and more meat?

I would love to, AND I'd love to stop being personally attacked, for something that I had not a thing to do with!

> Half of > your posts are line by line puffery in defense of you and the > dismissal of others.

Yes, more than half at this time I'd say, and believe me, I'm not happy about it.

> It would be lovely if you could just state your > opinion on the subject and leave us to decide the merits of each > different arguement

Agreed, but when you're the brunt of people's personal attacks that makes it a bit hard, at least for me, especially when what's being stated as the "story" is not what happened, as clearly shown by the archives. What do you suggest I do, Marc? Simply sit in a room with people make up things, and demeaning me to my face, as if I was not there, and say nothing? Unless their intent is to try to bully me into leaving... It is funny (strange) to me that some people claim they want "fair", but they somehow want to punnish me for something that I had nothing to do with. How is that fair? Isn't that hypocritical?

Would it be best if I just let those that want to have at it/me, do so...and that may make them feel better? At my expense? I know I'm not finding much useful here. I'm sure as I do, most others here will have better things to do than this!

Regards,

Austin
 
Just a quick note:

If there's any one who's interested in why I believe Finney, you can e-mail me at shuhsien@ms7.url.com.tw. It's nothing subjective.

In psychology, most pomposity comes from lack of confidence, and the rest should just follow from there.

Best, Shu-Hsien
 
> The point that Austin is clearly making in this forum is his desire to protect us from "charlatans," meaning by that term, I imagine, people who are not only ignorant but up to no good, and who intend to mislead us. Fools that we are.

I do not wish to be protected. I do not mind the forum being moderated, or edited, but I'd like to think I have access to the widest possible variety of views. If Finney is "wrong," whatever that might mean, we will all know that soon enough.

If someone disagrees with an opinion or something claimed to be a "fact," simply state that disagreement, and why. If you want to state your credentials, fine, but be ready for a big "So what?"

Personal attacks: No one said Austin was ignorant or unqualified in his field. No one has disputed his knowledge, not even Finney. The problem is that we all know that experts can, and often do, disagree.

One of the great lines from Pogo, a cartoon character from years ago, was "He who strikes the first blow loses the argument." (Although that may have been said by Albert, the alligator.) The attacks by Austin on Finney and everyone who disagrees with him are the verbal equivalent of physical blows. The more he attacks those who disagree with him (although he claims self-defense), the more we all see that he is protecting his position not with intellect but with the equivalent of physical violence, and thereby losing the argument.

And this is not supposed to be an argument, but a discussion. It is a meaningless discussion if it is only open to certain people. Some opinions will be right, some will be wrong, and some will be uninformed. I accept that as a reality, and I don't recall asking for help in making up my mind about which is which.

Personally, I am very interested in what Kyocera is up to, in terms of producing a quality digital imaging system. I am convinced, I guess, that a digital back for the G system is not realistic. A new digital G3 is my wish, but I am sure that the N digital users do not want their system abandoned, either.

On those lines, the thinking of the producers of such cameras, as Finney was alluding to, is interesting. Is he correct? Is he qualified? He could be correct without being qualified at all. Did he test the cameras? So what? Every test, no matter how objective it appears, is subjective at some level. Data needs to be evaluated and interpreted. And choosing how to test, the very first step, may be the most subjective step of all. From what I have seen of the results from the TVS digital it is marginally better than a Canon digital point and shoot. Big deal. I expected that, I guess. I expected more from Kyocera than a somewhat better point and shoot, and I know they have done much better.

>
 
Richard,

> The point that Austin is clearly making in this forum is his desire > to protect us from "charlatans,"

No, Richard, I am NOT making that point, and have no desire to. That is something YOU manufactured your self. Where did I ever say I was protecting anyone? I didn't, and I have no desire to either. I merely have a desire for accurate information, which has not a thing to do with opinion, BTW. Do not confuse the two.

> Personal attacks: No one said Austin was ignorant or unqualified in > his field. No one has disputed his knowledge, not even Finney.

Fact is, Richard, Finney DID dispute my knowledge, and question my integrity...and claim I was unqualified. Here is what Finney said:

"Very interesting, other than Contax Mailing list, now you are trying to grow some believers here, hum?" "you do not have to pretend that you know a lot."

"> Just a few Xilinx FPGA stuff does not mean much." (which, mind you, I never said, and is a complete fabrication on Finney's part)

"Chips> are not really your territory" (which again, is simply not true...)

"you do not have to pretend that you > know a lot."

What do you call that?

> If someone disagrees with an opinion or something claimed to be a > "fact," simply state that disagreement, and why.

I DID to exactly that, and Finney replied by being demeaning and dismissive.

> If you want to state > your credentials, fine, but be ready for a big "So what?"

I agree, but it is Finney who stated his credentials first, then claimed I was not qualified ("chips are not your territory", and "you do not have to pretend that you know a lot"), which led me to state some of my credentials.

> And this is not supposed to be an argument, but a discussion.

Agreed, and it is not supposed to be a lecture, with someone decreeing facts that simply aren't facts. You of all people, should know better than that, being a lawyer.

> The more he attacks those who disagree with him > (although he claims self-defense), the more we all see that he is > protecting his position not with intellect but with the equivalent of > physical violence, and thereby losing the argument.

That's utter nonsense, Richard. It's the reporting of completely erroneous and fabricated claims that I take issue with here. You are simply making things up that did not happen. Why, I don't know.

I also take issue with you calling my responses to YOUR peraonal attacks towards me as being "attacks", as they are simply not. I have not once attacked you, or done so in any of the responses I've made in the "post Finney" posts. That is simply rhetoric you are using to try to further YOUR agenda, what ever that is. My responses ARE simply defenses to YOUR, IMO, erroneous claims...whose facts bare them selves out in the archives.

So, if I state MY opinion on something, it's an attack, but when YOU make personal comments towards me, it's not? As I pointed out to your other post, isn't that hypocritical? Please answer the question, Richard...why is that you feel I should be punished for Finney being tossed off the list, when the fact is, I had not a thing to do with it?

Come on...if you are so interested in the truth, go back and read the thread. The link is below. Plain and simple. The facts are RIGHT there before your very eyes, that is if you really want to see them. You say you are a lawyer, yet you are not interested in the facts? Why is that, Richard? What are you making such a big fuss about this for?

Austin
 
Austin,

You said:
>In response to him being an "IT Professional": "I'm not sure why that caries any credence to his/her statements..." Hardly demeaning.

Yes, taken in that context, it does not seem demeaning. But look at your full comments below,

Austin said:
>I take it this is the same friend who is an "IT Professional"? I'm not sure why that caries any credence to his/her statements and how it relates to the subject of digital photography...as IT has to do with setting up computers and installing software on them, and mainting them, not a thing to do with "technology" in general...but none the less...

Now I think that is quite demeaning and dismissive and no small wonder why Finney was offended and came in with a less than friendly attitude towards you. And perhaps that explains why he started comparing credentials, since you claimed so dismissively that IT has to do with starting up of pc and installing software.

Austin also said in reply to Richard:
>My initial posts on this were not rude or dismissive. My later ones certainly were...but only because what was posted, to me, was as well. I don't see any need for humor when being personally attacked.

Yet Austin replied to me previously in a different manner, when I suggested that he was far from diplomatic right from the beginning but was dismissive:
>You are correct. I was dismissive. As I have clearly stated, and this is not news to anyone here or to Finney, so I will state it again, I believe Finney believes he knows more than he actually does. He states things as fact, not as opinion...whether they are right or wrong, that does not matter...that alone puts other people off, and when challenged, he does not behave well, and makes things personal. Typically, when someone challenges a claim I make, I then provide substantiation to my statements...and the other party provides substantiation as to why they disagree...not so in Finney's case. I wish it were different, but it is not uncommon for someone who is over their head to behave this way. That is not meant at all as a shot at Finney, just an observation I've made over time.

So which is which? I am puzzled.

Austin, it is not nice to call people charlatan too. True, being an IT person does not mean he is qualified to make comments on this field, but neither does it disqualify him. He may or may not have knowledge which may or may not come from his chosen profession. And hey, it's Sheu's life, Sheu's friend, Sheu's choice of whom he wants to believe in.

Things don't happen without reason. Cause and effect. Maybe it's time to do some soul searching if not one, not two, but many others have found it necessary to step into such unpleasant business to voice out their disapproval.
 
Yeo Yin Khoon et al who keep going on about this; for Heavens Sake can we not leave it now.
John
 
Back
Top