From: stephe_k on
Ray Fischer wrote:
> stephe_k(a)yahoo.com <stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> stephe_k(a)yahoo.com <stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>> Oh, RANGEFINDER cameras.
>>>>>
>>>>> But that isn't the subject, is it?
>>>> Did you look at the threat title? ^_^
>>> The one that was created 23 posts ago?
>>>
>>> You're new to this whole usenet thing, aren't you? Or are you just
>>> incapable of responding to what people actualy write?
>> Read back through the posts Ray,
>
> Read the post you responded to, idiot.
>


LOL I was responding to YOU ^_^

Of course you snip out "EVERYONE was talking about rangefinder cameras
except you." So yes Ray, I guess if I read YOUR post where YOU were
talking about an SLR, YOU were the only one talking about them!

Stephanie
From: Ray Fischer on
stephe_k(a)yahoo.com <stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> stephe_k(a)yahoo.com <stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> stephe_k(a)yahoo.com <stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>> Oh, RANGEFINDER cameras.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But that isn't the subject, is it?
>>>>> Did you look at the threat title? ^_^
>>>> The one that was created 23 posts ago?
>>>>
>>>> You're new to this whole usenet thing, aren't you? Or are you just
>>>> incapable of responding to what people actualy write?
>>> Read back through the posts Ray,
>>
>> Read the post you responded to, idiot.
>
>LOL I was responding to YOU ^_^

No, you were responding to the voices in your head. You did not seem
to read what _I_ actually wrote.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer(a)sonic.net

From: stephe_k on
Ray Fischer wrote:
> stephe_k(a)yahoo.com <stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> stephe_k(a)yahoo.com <stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>> stephe_k(a)yahoo.com <stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>> Oh, RANGEFINDER cameras.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But that isn't the subject, is it?
>>>>>> Did you look at the threat title? ^_^
>>>>> The one that was created 23 posts ago?
>>>>>
>>>>> You're new to this whole usenet thing, aren't you? Or are you just
>>>>> incapable of responding to what people actualy write?
>>>> Read back through the posts Ray,
>>> Read the post you responded to, idiot.
>> LOL I was responding to YOU ^_^
>
> No, you were responding to the voices in your head. You did not seem
> to read what _I_ actually wrote.
>


You wrote

"Oh, RANGEFINDER cameras.

But that isn't the subject, is it?"

I think when you responded to the post

"It should be possible to make an eye-safe laser rangefinder system"

most people would comprehend this was talking about a rangefinder? LOL!

So how am I the idiot for noting only YOU didn't comprehend this WHOLE
discussion was about range finder cameras. hehe

Stephanie
From: Ray Fischer on
stephe_k(a)yahoo.com <stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> stephe_k(a)yahoo.com <stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> stephe_k(a)yahoo.com <stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>> stephe_k(a)yahoo.com <stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>>> Oh, RANGEFINDER cameras.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But that isn't the subject, is it?
>>>>>>> Did you look at the threat title? ^_^
>>>>>> The one that was created 23 posts ago?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're new to this whole usenet thing, aren't you? Or are you just
>>>>>> incapable of responding to what people actualy write?
>>>>> Read back through the posts Ray,
>>>> Read the post you responded to, idiot.
>>> LOL I was responding to YOU ^_^
>>
>> No, you were responding to the voices in your head. You did not seem
>> to read what _I_ actually wrote.
>
>You wrote
>
>"Oh, RANGEFINDER cameras.

You really are quite stupid, aren't you? Go back one more post in the
thread.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer(a)sonic.net

From: Paul Furman on
Paul Furman wrote:
> Bruce wrote:
>> Paul Furman wrote:
>>> Wilba wrote:
>>>> David J. Littleboy wrote:
>>>>> Wilba wrote:
>>>>>> David J. Littleboy wrote:
>>>>>>> ... there are now ... good pancake lenses for the 5D2 ...
>>>>>> I didn't know that. Brands? Models? Thanks.
>>>>> The Voigtlander 40/2.0 is real sweet.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sample FF image: http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/120719456/original
>>>>> http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/2008-06-blog.html#_20080601Voigtlander
>>>>> http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/2009-04-blog.html
>>>>
>> The 40mm f/2 is sharp but the background bokeh is very harsh indeed,
>> giving distinct "bright line" rendition of out-of-focus highlights. It
>> improves by f/4, but I wonder what is the point of designing a lens
>> that performs so badly wide open. It is a very poor replacement for
>> the 45mm f/2.8 Nikkor AI-P.
>
> Well the 45 Ai-P wasn't exactly a cream machine in my experience but
> we'll see. I like that it's a tad wider and supposed to be more
> comfortable to focus.

The 40/2 bokeh can be broken:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/edgehill/4504208171/sizes/l/

But overall I think it did better than the 45 by being faster and wider
and a real clean rendition:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/edgehill/4504205405/sizes/l/

So far I like the performance and operation. I isn't as small as I'd
hoped and has a dorky form factor but build is primo, focus smooth,
focus ring has a soft grippy glide. The lens cap stinks, the shade is a
lame copy of the 45 and the closeup lens works pretty good, although
messy in a retro way.

I wouldn't hesitate to use this for low light situations:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/edgehill/4504194541/sizes/o/in/set-72157616397551780/