How many cameras? (Page 15): You never answered my question I posed to you a while back, you instead decided my question was offensive so you blocked me. Question was, do you know...

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

Chris T wrote:

Oh, well, Chris ... in that case ... I now detect a seconding ... if that be the case ... thanks ...

So be it!

You never answered my question I posed to you a while back, you instead decided my question was offensive so you blocked me. Question was, do you know anything about the art of photography? I asked this because all of your threads are only about cameras and lenses ect.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Racmanaz wrote:

You never answered my question I posed to you a while back, you instead decided my question was offensive so you blocked me. Question was, do you know anything about the art of photography? I asked this because all of your threads are only about cameras and lenses ect.

If I blocked you for being offensive ... then - there was good reason ....

Early on ... I did several posts on the Art of Photography .... one of them worked out well ... but the other one became quite degraded, pretty quickly ....

So, I've never chosen to post that kind of thing, again ....

My Topic Posts aren't ALWAYS about equipment ... in fact, they are quite varied ... over four months, now - at a minimum of two per day ... that's around 300 - no?

Do a search for Topic Posts by Chris T ... answer any you wish to, Rac ... I'll respond ... no matter how old it is .... (I'll unblock you, so you can - okay?)

BlackRipleyDog

Chris T wrote:

You know, Ripley ... I think I read somewhere that... (show quote)

So it appears I am off your Ignore List. How delightful. I can breath a sigh of relief now and rejoin the party with you holding court yet again.
You are many things but nuanced is not one of them as evidenced by your reply.
You make tortured Wiki-pro statements in that gotcha condescending way you do. You have absolutely ZERO experience with the things you put out.
And yes, you jackass, I do know they are BOTH 36MP. So please put me back on your naughty list.

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

Verrrry interesting! I see that pmsc70d (the OP of this thread) has checked out and good old Chris T has taken over and is now holding court in his inimitable and argumentative way. I don't think I'll join this one.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

pmsc70d wrote:

Over the months I have been viewing UHH, I've seen lots of posts and photos indicating that some members have not just one or two, but many DSLR bodies. I'm curious if this is something necessary for the kind of photos they need to do, or just a trail of GAS? If you have several bodies (camera bodies, that is) do you use them all? How do you use them differently? Thanks

Yes, I use all my cameras (well, I have a couple that are just collecting dust). When shooting film - for animals, sports, etc., I use my 35mm SLR,s, if shooting landscape, I mostly shoot MF. Shooting digital, I too have always a back-up with me, but I shoot them both regularly. Soon I will add another Body, then my "now" main body will become my back-up (but I will continue shooting with my "now" back-up even then)!

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

BlackRipleyDog wrote:

So it appears I am off your Ignore List. How delightful. I can breath a sigh of relief now and rejoin the party with you holding court yet again.
You are many things but nuanced is not one of them as evidenced by your reply.
You make tortured Wiki-pro statements in that gotcha condescending way you do. You have absolutely ZERO experience with the things you put out.
And yes, you jackass, I do know they are BOTH 36MP. So please put me back on your naughty list.

Ripley ... I'd hoped this post would put us back on an even keel, but, now, I see that's not possible ...

Don't worry ... I never took you OFF my ignore list ... but, THIS is not one of my posts ....

Jackass, huh? ... Is that like a mule, or a donkey? .... Never mind answering, I have a feeling they're all pretty much the same ... not like a burro - they're pretty tame!

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

mcveed wrote:

Verrrry interesting! I see that pmsc70d (the OP of this thread) has checked out and good old Chris T has taken over and is now holding court in his inimitable and argumentative way. I don't think I'll join this one.

Taken over, huh, Don?

Not at all ... but I do like to try and respond to everyone who answers me, whether it's my Topic Post, or another's ... it's called - Common Courtesy ....

Valsmere Loc: New Jersey

Currently I have a d750, d500, d700 ( a family member needed some extra money and I agreed to the d700) and a Fuji XPRO 2.
I wanted the full frame 750 for landscapes and such. The 500 for the speed and action photos. I picked up the XPRO 2 as an everyday carry camera and I also had always wanted a range finder style body.

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

Chris T wrote:

Taken over, huh, Don?

Not at all ... but I do like to try and respond to everyone who answers me, whether it's my Topic Post, or another's ... it's called - Common Courtesy ....

And then they reply to you out of courtesy, and then you reply to them again out of courtesy, etc, etc, etc. And nobody considers addressing their remarks to the OP 'out of courtesy'.

Bill_de Loc: US

mcveed wrote:

And then they reply to you out of courtesy, and then you reply to them again out of courtesy, etc, etc, etc. And nobody considers addressing their remarks to the OP 'out of courtesy'.

Two a day is not enough for Chris, so whenever he sees an opening he hijacks somebody else's thread. If anybody did the same to him he would have them on his ignore list in a New York minute. He has two standards, one for his threads and one for those he weasels his way into.

Always good for comic relief!

--

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

mcveed wrote:

And then they reply to you out of courtesy, and then you reply to them again out of courtesy, etc, etc, etc. And nobody considers addressing their remarks to the OP 'out of courtesy'.

If they did, Don ... I wouldn't answer it ... but, if they address ME, I feel "common courtesy" decrees - I should answer it ....

I don't see that as a "hi-jacking" ...

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Bill_de wrote:

Two a day is not enough for Chris, so whenever he sees an opening he hijacks somebody else's thread. If anybody did the same to him he would have them on his ignore list in a New York minute. He has two standards, one for his threads and one for those he weasels his way into.

Always good for comic relief!

--

Bill ... if someone answers me, directly - I don't particularly care whether it's on my post, or somebody else's post. As you've pointed out, quite accurately - with two posts of my own to tend to, every single day ... I have no need to hone in on someone else's Topic Post. I answered this one, initially - as I believed the Op was in some way, addressing me. He has never ever responded to my response to him, but, a great many folks have used this post to respond to my initial comment. I've just followed on with each comment addressed to me, on this post, as I felt it was common courtesy to reply. Hi-jacking? ... Come on, Bill. That's NOT what this is!

I only add people to my Ignore List when they are rude to me. I would NEVER put someone on my ignore list for taking over one of my threads. Why would I?

Bill_de Loc: US

Chris T wrote:

Bill ... if someone answers me, directly - I don't... (show quote)

Chris, you act as if every post somebody makes is directed to you. Go back through the thread and look at the posts you responded to that were just answering the OP. That's how you hijack other people threads. You might be oblivious to it, but if you take a critical look you will see that you try to make everything revolve around you.

Have a good night.

--

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Bill_de wrote:

Chris, you act as if every post somebody makes is directed to you. Go back through the thread and look at the posts you responded to that were just answering the OP. That's how you hijack other people threads. You might be oblivious to it, but if you take a critical look you will see that you try to make everything revolve around you.

Have a good night.

--

Bill ... you've miss-read the Thread. YOU go back and look at the posts. You will see that when folks answer the Thread question, I don't respond. I ONLY respond when the poster answers ME on this thread. You've gotten entirely the wrong idea, Bill. You know, sometimes, it pays to adjust your very own stance .... try it!!!!!

Bill_de Loc: US

Chris T wrote:

Bill ... you've miss-read the Thread. YOU go back and look at the posts. You will see that when folks answer the Thread question, I don't respond. I ONLY respond when the poster answers ME on this thread. You've gotten entirely the wrong idea, Bill. You know, sometimes, it pays to adjust your very own stance .... try it!!!!!

Chris, I said you were probably oblivious to what you were doing and didn't take a critical look. Here is the list of people who you responded to in this thread who, up to that point, had only responded to the OP or somebody else.

racerrich3
rehess
Brucej67
Delderby
Apbrush
rvhowdy
harly82fxr
bull drink water
carl hervol
BigGWells
wj cody
Bugfan
cjc2
GoofyNewfie
BebuLamar
btbj
canon Lee
Quinn 4
n3eg

----