And where is your scientific proof that Bill's findings are wrong? Your argument is just as anecdotal without it.
Dave At 09:35 AM 15/11/2006, J. C. O'Connell wrote: >I'm not the bonehead who thinks that all lenses >are just as easy to focus regardless of focal >length which you tried to imply was the case with your >unscientific anecdotal "test". >jco > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >William Robb >Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 6:31 PM >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >Subject: Re: Using a Super Tak w/ istDS- A challange to the list? > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Cory Papenfuss" >Subject: Re: Using a Super Tak w/ istDS- A challange to the list? > > > > > >> You're correct on this JCO. Bill Robb is bating you. Ignore him and > >> he'll stop. Paul > > > > Agreed. > >. >You are buying into the same boneheaded mistake that JCO is, which is >that the world is full of absolutes, and exceptions are not to be >tolerated. >John (and perhaps you) is an idealogue. All things are black or white, >good or bad, yes or no. >Consequently, when something comes up that doesn't match his predisposed > >view of the world, he feels he must attack it. >He won't accept that something may be true most of the time, with the >occassional exception. He will only accept that it is true all the time, > >and that if someone finds a situation that doesn't meet the criteria, >then that person is attacking his idealogical position, and must be >stopped at any cost. > >William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
