Bipod wrote:
I don't think an aspiring machinest should learn to turn on a computer-controlled lathe.
There's lots of complexity there that has nothing to do with basic lathe operation.
And knowing how to run a computer-controlled lathe doesn't mean someone can run a
manual lathe. That's all I'm saying.
Whatcha got there is a computer-controlled camera, with maybe 300,000 or more lines of code,
all secret, undoubtably containing a few bugs. It's making decisions for the photographer,
and yet its far less intelligent than a mouse. And every automated camera is different:
different algorithms, different trade-offs.
You can turn off *some* of the automated features, but you can't get rid of the inherent
complexity of an embedded system. Complexity always "leaks" out...
There is a reason why generations of photography instructures had their students use Pentax K-1000
cameras -- the simplest SLR on the market. Demand from schools kept the K-1000 in production
from 1976 until 1997 -- 21 years! A student could completely understand that camera. It was
easy to prove the camera was working. And it was solidly-constructed and inexpensive.
Basic lathes are common, basic digital cameras aren't. No reason why a camera manufacturer
couldn't design and make a manual digital camera -- guess the market it is too small because many
people don't realize its value as a learning tool.
I don't think an aspiring machinest should learn ... (
show quote)
Your analogy of a lathe may be correct, someone could get hurt, or damage something. But it means nothing in this case...if your trying to be sarcastic, this was not the time or place. Don't waste so much time being negative and let a guy get his granddaughter into photography.