[Guest]

[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1297807629' post='6139']

How was it ok for Nikon guys to bring up the 14-24 in every conversation until Canon showed up with the TS-E 17, TS-E 24 and the 24L II? Or the 70-200 VR II until the 70-200 IS II came out? Or for 35 years claim that no one needs a 24 1.4 until the 24 1.4G came out? That's just in the "FX" era, mind you... <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />[/quote]

Ahh, I see - hurt feelings, somewhere at the dpreview forums maybe? And you're out for revenge here now <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' />

Please, tell me that it's not childish.



[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1297807629' post='6139']Hello! We're in one of the most popular websites on the internet for comparing lenses (well done Klaus and Marcus!)... why is it wrong for a user in its discussion board to compare lenses? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />[/quote]

Yup, you know exactly what I mean - starting with "nikon buffs know nothing about technique" and ending with "blood shed and open fires rising from the Nikon camp". While at the same time accusing Chuck Norris Ken Rockwell et al being strongly opinionated. You know, pot, kettle, doesn't ring a bell?



I know that you work real hard to prove everyone (yourself included) that canon bests nikon in every single area, the latest 35mm f/1.4 being a good example, but apart of gaining the title of Chuck Norris jr, I'm not really sure what else you're going to achieve <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />