Jeese mate I think it's you that needs to get a life ...

Are there some rules in this forum about friendly behaviour.
This post of yours is just trying to bait this Rice guy.
Then you respond aggressively when he replies 'Thanks, but HOW to compare? n/t'
...which was a rather good point,

Sounds like you have a large ego issue to me
and no shortage of admirers here to help you polish it ?

Pete

Hi, Pete

First of all Ben IS a photographer which cannot be said for about 99.9% of the rest of us. Secondly he really was giving a wealth of info (and real, valuable one not mumbo jumbo like other "characters"). For me he and Chris will remain the people that quenched my thirst for K20D in the days of the launch. The ego I guess come with the territory and most if not all artists have it more or less. The problem with RH is (IMO) that his attitude is so bad and was so for so long that even some valid points he raises are lost in the general hostility towards him. Anyway Ben has the skill, gear and experience but RH (and many of the Ben's "admirers" for that matter) has none. It's really not fair to blame RH for nitpicking against Pentax and tolerate BS from people who will gladly give advice about gear they never held a second in their hands with a straight face.
Hellas, this is the nature of a forum, we have some "benjamins" (I hope you read 100 dollar bill ) and many 3 dollar fonnys.

My 3 cents ,
Radu

[and]

Its not a very interesting comparison, it shows you can get great photos with the k20d and great photos with hte 1Ds. you can also get great photos with olympus, panasoic, sony and nikon cameras. using base iso, well stopped down lens, everything on manual using a light meter to set exposure. what is the camera doing, just capturing the image at its ideal setting, any dslr on the market will create a great looking shot in this situation, especially if you make a small resized version of that picture. you might as well have used a canon g9 too, it would look great as well.

I thought everyone knew that its not iq at optimal settings that make up the difference between the different dslrs on the market. I dont see what the point is, some people want the 1Ds because of what it offers, some prefer the k20d, they will not perform the same way in every situation, I dont think there is any camera regardless of price that is best in every possible aspect. what is the point to be made here

[Transit]

Hello Pete;

I am sorry that you have come in to this at the time you did. I am rarely if ever aggressive with anyone. This is a very "OLD STORY" and what you have witnessed is the "Straw that broke the camels back" so to speak.

It has nothing to do with ego at all. If you understood the chronology of events, perhaps you could understand the context in which this was applied.

I can understand that under the circumstances you would naturally get the impression you did and for that I am truly sorry Pete.

None the less thanks for bringing up this issue and in the future I will try to understand that there are those that haven't followed the process and would consider my reactions as being rather curt to say the least.

Best Wishes and have a nice day.

Ben

Thanks Ben,
I appreciate your considerate and thoughtful reply !

cheers
Pete

[Jewelltrail]

My apologies for getting late to this post. There were many excellent points made in this post--thanks to all the contributors. I am emerging from the discussion with a simple question. I am not taking sides, I was just curious about something.

Benjikan, how come you began the post stating "both shot at optimum aperture"? Then, just a little while more into the post you, once again, this time in huge red letters, state "Both shot at Optimal aperture i.e. 2 to 3 stops down from "Wide Open"?

[schmik]

This really is an unfair comparison!

One shot is of a beautiful woman.
One of of hairy legged men in 'skirts'.
I am male.

Sometimes it is hard to get past the content and see the pixels

mike

[jonmay]

This is seriously one of the best posts I have read in ages.

Benjikan posted a couple of great shots; one with an industry leading camera from only a couple of years ago and one from the new Pentax. He didn't include any stats and Ricehigh but asked Ricehigh for a comparison. Ricehigh showed his intense ignorance of photography by suggesting he needed stats to compare the photos.

Ricehigh is so clearly blinded by his measurbation (who said that sort of thing doesn't make you go blind) that he couldn't see that both photos are great and that Pentax is at least as good as the top flight Canon of just a couple of years ago.

Benjikan I have to congratulate you on your trap that Ricehigh so eagerly fell straight into.

Hilarious!

[benjikan]

This is seriously one of the best posts I have read in ages.

Benjikan posted a couple of great shots; one with an industry leading camera from only a couple of years ago and one from the new Pentax. He didn't include any stats and Ricehigh but asked Ricehigh for a comparison. Ricehigh showed his intense ignorance of photography by suggesting he needed stats to compare the photos.

Ricehigh is so clearly blinded by his measurbation (who said that sort of thing doesn't make you go blind) that he couldn't see that both photos are great and that Pentax is at least as good as the top flight Canon of just a couple of years ago.

Benjikan I have to congratulate you on your trap that Ricehigh so eagerly fell straight into.

Hilarious!

"What we see IS what we get"...Or could that read "What we GET is what we see"?

Ben

---

Last edited by benjikan; 07-01-2008 at 01:39 AM.

[jonny1986]

i'm not on the level of benjikan, up to the monet not maybe in the future)))), but it happened to me to shoot some galleries at car show side by side with nikon and canon shooters, and i find the clors of nikon flat and canon fake. i don't like them. I find the pentax k10d colors superb and real. i love them.
sample of venetian carnival:








for me pentax is incrdible in terms of color and rendition. i love it.
i'm eager to receeive the k20d and my new 50-135.

[Jewelltrail]

I will try this again, since benjikan seems to have not seen this question the first time I asked it just a few threads up.



Benjikan, how come you began the post stating "both shot at optimum aperture"? Then, just a little while more into the post you, once again, this time in huge red letters, state "Both shot at Optimal aperture i.e. 2 to 3 stops down from "Wide Open"?


Regards,

Ernest

[benjikan]

I will try this again, since benjikan seems to have not seen this question the first time I asked it just a few threads up.



Benjikan, how come you began the post stating "both shot at optimum aperture"? Then, just a little while more into the post you, once again, this time in huge red letters, state "Both shot at Optimal aperture i.e. 2 to 3 stops down from "Wide Open"?


Regards,

Ernest

I don't understand what you are referring to. I added another image because one of the two originally posted was not at it's optimal aperture i.e. f 18.0 and therefore added another at f5.6 if that is what you are referring to.

Ben

[cputeq]

i'm eager to receeive the k20d and my new 50-135

You're going to love this setup. Just make sure you do some focusing tests and check for BF/FF -- My shiny new K20D and 50-135 was apparently frontfocusing when I first got them. I didn't do a focus check and thought the K20D quality was off. Glad I checked it!

And, K20D's lens correction is awesome. A quick flip through the menus for an adjustment and now the lens is where it should be -- Which is 90% of the time mounted on my K20D

[Jewelltrail]

“I don't understand what you are referring to. I added another image because one of the two originally posted was not at it's optimal aperture i.e. f 18.0 and therefore added another at f5.6 if that is what you are referring to.”

Ben

Ben:

This is a long post. It would do you well to go back to the start and read the first page of posts. This will show you what I have summarized for you below:

You began the post with the claim, but with no EXIF support, that “both shots at optimum aperture.” Rice High called you on that—you became defensive and rude. You then made the same claim again, but this time with different words and in bright, big red letters. But Rice High called you on that again.

So not once, but twice you tried to force Rice High and the rest of us to simply trust you at your word. When Rich High did not, you became even more defensive and rude. Here is how you arrogantly posted it the second time:

Both shot at Optimal aperture i.e. 2 to 3 stops down from "Wide Open"

Asking for EXIF data is a normal request on this forum, particualry with a post as controversial as this one. But each time Rice High asked, you responded as if he had no right to challenge your authority.

Finally, ftpaddict posted the EXIF data clearly showing what you claimed about aperture was, in fact, wrong—the Canon shot you posted and represented at “maximum” aperture was actually taken @ f 18. You then rudely jumped all over Rice High again, claiming he would scream diffraction. This led you to post another Canon pic @ f 5.6.

Can you see where I am going with this?

Regards,

Ernest

[benjikan]

Ben:

This is a long post. It would do you well to go back to the start and read the first page of posts. This will show you what I have summarized for you below:

You began the post with the claim, but with no EXIF support, that “both shots at optimum aperture.” Rice High called you on that—you became defensive and rude. You then made the same claim again, but this time with different words and in bright, big red letters. But Rice High called you on that again.

So not once, but twice you tried to force Rice High and the rest of us to simply trust you at your word. When Rich High did not, you became even more defensive and rude. Here is how you arrogantly posted it the second time:

Both shot at Optimal aperture i.e. 2 to 3 stops down from "Wide Open"

Asking for EXIF data is a normal request on this forum, particualry with a post as controversial as this one. But each time Rice High asked, you responded as if he had no right to challenge your authority.

Finally, ftpaddict posted the EXIF data clearly showing what you claimed about aperture was, in fact, wrong—the Canon shot you posted and represented at “maximum” aperture was actually taken @ f 18. You then rudely jumped all over Rice High again, claiming he would scream diffraction. This led you to post another Canon pic @ f 5.6.

Can you see where I am going with this?

Regards,

Ernest

...and that is why I posted another image at f5.6. It was an oversight. I suspect you noticed that I said that I would be called on that issue, therefore my posting of another sample at optimum aperture. No, I don't know where you are going with this. Edify me...

Ben

[Jewelltrail]

“...and that is why I posted another image at f5.6. It was an oversight. I suspect you noticed that I said that I would be called on that issue, therefore my posting of another sample at optimum aperture. No, I don't know where you are going with this. Edify me...”

Ben

Unfortunately, the edification process needs to be started with your own conscience. The only reason you posted another image is because of the diligent efforts of Rice High—he forced you to uncover your own error. In fact, Rice High's two eyeballs are good, but your "oversight" shows yours are not. A gentleman would have apologized and thanked him for the betterment he brought to your post. When a member of this forum asks you a simple & valid question you need to respectfully reply, not shoot out knee-jerk, arrogant reactions like the two below---

Ben: “RH...What? I used the F---ING camera for "WORK, JOBS, ASSIGNMENTS, EXPERIENCE and MONEY!" That is how I compared them.

GeeeeZZZZZZZZZZZ.”

And again:

"Ben “Use your eyes RH. You have eyes don't you.”

You are not entitled to step on other people at this forum simply because you make a living with a camera. There are other people who make a living with their cameras here too, but we do not seen them resorting to dehumanization tactics.


Another forum member here uses a signature on all his posts. Have you seen this signature Ben? You would do well to read it, perhaps even write it on the chalkboard a few hundred times.


“It is nice to be important, but it is more important to be nice.”

Regards,

Ernest

[Maxington]

Unfortunately, the edification process needs to be started with your own conscience. The only reason you posted another image is because of the diligent efforts of Rice High—he forced you to uncover your own error. In fact, Rice High's two eyeballs are good, but your "oversight" shows yours are not. A gentleman would have apologized and thanked him for the betterment he brought to your post. When a member of this forum asks you a simple & valid question you need to respectfully reply, not shoot out knee-jerk, arrogant reactions like the two below---

When Ricehigh extends that courtesy to other people, and on his biased blog, then you might have a point. Ricehigh has been proved wrong many times over many many things and does not acknowledge it.

You are not entitled to step on other people at this forum simply because you make a living with a camera. There are other people who make a living with their cameras here too, but we do not seen them resorting to dehumanization tactics.

From what I've noticed, anyone that Ben "steps on" is usually well deserving of it. Everyone else who treats him with respect gets respect in return. Did you read the other posts by Ben in this very thread?

And Ben's opinion does count more than Ricehigh. He makes a living in one of the most difficult aspects of photography, and amazingly, actually owned or owns the cameras he discusses. Ricehigh is the equivalent of a armchair hobbyist telling a professional racing driver that his car sucks and his settings were all wrong, all the while ignoring the fact that the driver just won the race.