bmattock
Mentor
http://www.shutterbug.com/equipmentreviews/compact_digicams/052908sigma/index.html
Click the link to read the rest.
Click the link to read the rest.
squirrel$$$bandit
Mentor
I read that review, and think it's pretty fair. I continue to like my DP1 a lot...a weird little camera.
lZr
L&M
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif].......Because the lens is fixed focal length there is no vignetting problem......[/FONT]
You can learn a lot from the article
You can learn a lot from the article
squirrel$$$bandit
Mentor
Yeah, I am pretty curious now about the pedophiles comment. I've never read that magazine...what happened?
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Not half as puzzled as I am, and I've been writing for 'em for 20 years. My wife's response is the same: this is a very strange comment. She's been writing for them since '92.
Cheers,
Roger
Al Patterson
Ferroequinologist
It's "Bob Shell Derangement Syndrome". The man is no longer the editor. I don't hold his it against those who work there for the sins of a former editor.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Dear Al,
Bob photographed young women (very rarely under 18, because of US law -- the paedophilia charge is nonsense). Although Bob is a dear friend, I have to admit that I preferred almost all his other pictures to his nudes (and, far more usually, semi-nudes).
Besides which, there were really very few of Bob's nude pics in the magazine. Anyone who was offended by them would have had to WANT to be offended, and to look quite hard to find enough pics to be offended by them.
Infinitely more 'sexualized' pictures of young women are to be found in almost any European magazine; and besides, as my wife pointed out, how do you 'sexualize' a picture of a young woman? Some men will see everything as 'sexualized'; some won't. What she saw was pictures that neither of us can readily imagine as turning anyone on.
Cheers,
R.
Bob photographed young women (very rarely under 18, because of US law -- the paedophilia charge is nonsense). Although Bob is a dear friend, I have to admit that I preferred almost all his other pictures to his nudes (and, far more usually, semi-nudes).
Besides which, there were really very few of Bob's nude pics in the magazine. Anyone who was offended by them would have had to WANT to be offended, and to look quite hard to find enough pics to be offended by them.
Infinitely more 'sexualized' pictures of young women are to be found in almost any European magazine; and besides, as my wife pointed out, how do you 'sexualize' a picture of a young woman? Some men will see everything as 'sexualized'; some won't. What she saw was pictures that neither of us can readily imagine as turning anyone on.
Cheers,
R.
Al Patterson
Ferroequinologist
Well, some Europeans think we in the US are prudes. And they may be right, in some cases. Bob posted a lot of his more adult stuff on CompuServe years ago, and some were good, some not so good. I agree the stuff in "Shutterbug" was tame compared to his other work and what one might find in European advertisements, but such is life that we all don't agree on this.
I still subscribe to "Shutterbug", as the better European mags cost too much to subscribe to, but I do buy a few European mags from time to time if they have a review I want to read. Borders isn't the library...
