[danielausparis]

It seems some people here don't get irony. LOL.

then think what the advantages an MF lens (example 50mm) would be on an MF body as compared to MF lens (50mm) on APS-C body. not that difficult to understand.

Even more confused now. Discussion was about something entirely different: how, in some cases, a MF lens (example: 165mm) can provide very good services on APS-C.

[xGene]

It seems some people here don't get irony. LOL.

Yes, and unfortunately, it generally comes from the same few people... Welcome to the Forums by the way. Bienvenue! In the forums' defense, 99.99% of people here behave professionally and are tolerant of other people's weaknesses in English.

xGene

[Pentaxor]

Why the condescending tone? He just said English is not his first language. Give the guy a break! Or is it becuase he doesn't have as many posts as you??? If you feel you are repeating yourself or it's not worth repeating, just don't.
xGene

condescending tone? well for starters, I'm not the one who made or used a WTF abbrev in succession. you are barking at the wrong tree there. and this is not about who has more post counts.

[Pentaxor]

Even more confused now. Discussion was about something entirely different: how, in some cases, a MF lens (example: 165mm) can provide very good services on APS-C.

you are confused because you just dont get the point no matter how simple nor short the statement is.

[xGene]

condescending tone? well for starters, I'm not the one who made or used a WTF abbrev in succession. you are barking at the wrong tree there. and this is not about who has more post counts.

Are you saying your tone was not condescending? How would you qualify it then? We are not talking about krb's post here (although you did use WTF yourself ...), but your reply post to danielausparis.

You don't seem to have much tolerance to people that don't absolutely agree with your point of views...

[xGene]

you are confused because you just dont get the point no matter how simple nor short the statement is.

...and then again....

Moderator, please?

[Pentaxor]

Yes, and unfortunately, it generally comes from the same few people... Welcome to the Forums by the way. Bienvenue! In the forums' defense, 99.99% of people here behave professionally and are tolerant of other people's weaknesses in English.

xGene

I see. so my idiomatic use of the term "English" was taken "literally offensive". as far as professional behavior and tolerance is concerned, make sure that you aren't being selective and seeing to it which statement are more condenscending.

for sure, my use of the word English wasn't used in any malicious or condenscending manner compared to our new and confused friend stated beforehand.

---

Last edited by Pentaxor; 05-05-2010 at 01:19 PM.

[Pentaxor]

Are you saying your tone was not condescending? How would you qualify it then? We are not talking about krb's post here (although you did use WTF yourself ...), but your reply post to danielausparis.

Yes, my tone was not condenscending. I used it as an idiomatic expression towards myself and my explanation, not literally towards krb as what krb thought, and you jumped on as well.

as far as tolerance, what is difficult to understand about my statement that I prefer so and so because of the things that I could get for using so and so. if krb is happy about his opinion, so be it. I got no problem with that. I don't get the point nor appreciate the way that krb rebutted with "WTF" as if insinuating something negative and yes, condenscending as you would call it. I hope that I dont have to explain myself again. and thanks, I would no longer post concerning this matter, whether krb understands or not my preference. no irony here. just some person who just dont get the picture and kept on rebutting for whatever purpose.

[xGene]

I see. so my idiomatic use of the term "English" was taken "literally offensive". as far as professional behavior and tolerance is concerned, make sure that you aren't being selective and seeing to it which statement are more condenscending.

for sure, my use of the word English wasn't used in any malicious or condenscending manner compared to our new and confused friend mentioned here.

Wow!!! I rest my case!!! This is a forum, buddy. In case you haven't noticed, people from all over the world are pitching-in. That's what makes it a great place to learn stuff. If you can't cope with people having "accents", please by all means, start your own forum... It would be a shame to lose you though as you occasionally provide good insights.

For the benefit of this Forum, PM me if you want to take this further.

xGene

[danielausparis]

you are confused because you just dont get the point no matter how simple nor short the statement is.

No, Sir. I am confused by reading your posts in this thread...

[hangu]

For the benefit of this Forum, PM me if you want to take this further.

xGene

No, don't stop. I'm sitting here at work with a bag of popcorn, constantly refreshing the browser window to see the next salvo of replies. Keep at it!

Pentaxor, xGene PMed me to say that your mom was wtf-fat!

[Pentaxor]

No, Sir. I am confused by reading your posts in this thread...

I think I found the reason behind your confusion. >>> https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/welcomes-introductions/95995-hi-paris.html

[danielausparis]

No, don't stop. I'm sitting here at work with a bag of popcorn, constantly refreshing the browser window to see the next salvo of replies. Keep at it!

Pentaxor, xGene PMed me to say that your mom was wtf-fat!

LOL! no no, I'm quitting. Good night! (it's 11pm here).

[krb]

read my post again and the succeeding posts as well carefully so that you will have a much clearer understanding of WTF I'm talking about. I'm not clueless, nor is my English is.

Then help me out here.


When you say

there are just too many great 35mm lens options that it won't make sense putting or buying an MF (medium format) lens to a Pentax APS-C dslr. although surely there are great MF lenses out there, but some of those great MF lenses are rare or can be expensive. thus buying a 35mm lens would be much more logical choice. an MF adapter would be hard to find and pricey as well. an M42 adapter for a lot of M42 35mm lenses is cheap and easy to find. and there are lots of nice and cheap Taks and other 3rd party 35mm lenses available.

it certainly looks to me like you are saying "some MF lenses are rare and expensive, therefore it does not make sense to buy -any- MF lens even if the MF lens you are looking at offers excellent quality and has a low price." If that is not what you are saying then please feel free to correct my interpretation because it simply doesn't add up.

lastly, it would be pointless to use an MF on any APS-C dslr due to crop factor. the main idea of having an MF lens is for a wider perspective, DOF and far better resolution due to lens and camera capability, which you can't do on an existing APS-C camera. if you really want to make the best out of an MF lens and fully utilize it, buy an MF body. you don't buy a lens that you can only use 50% or less of it's capability.

Perhaps if you could explain all those 35mm lenses you have listed in your signature alongside an APS-C camera. Is it okay to use only 66% of the capability of the lens but using 50% is pointless? If I do a search of your earlier posts will I find where you have railed against M4/3 shooters adapting 35mm lenses to their cameras since they will also fall below this 50% usage level?

[Marc Sabatella]

Hah, I can see at least one poster on this thread who has fallen victim to this ambiguity, but what makes you think that I have the two confused?

Just the fact that your question sort of implied you thought a lot of people actually used medium format lenses. Although I recognize you didn't exactly *say* that.