oldraven

Forgive a foreigner, but who's John Bowe?

Yeah, the 3.2 vs. 8.2 was my personal experience. The 6.0 was a recomendation from a camera tech. (who doesn't make commision, so he wasn't trying to upsell me. I didn't even buy my camera there) I'll admit, this guy wasn't exactly a solid source of information, so can I take my lumps for repeating something without validating it? Absolutely. I'll chime in with the Canon talk. IMO, you can't beat the value and feature per dollar aspect of a Canon.

This is America. Who the f*ck cares about the sick, desperate or needy? The sad thing is there are enough instances where Auto companies are actually at fault. Making seats too comfortable (causing drivers to fall asleep) would not be one of them. Now trucks catching fire while parked in the garage, and burning down your house, that's another story. As for unstable SUV's, it's a common sense thing. In my Jeep Cherokee there is a warning on the back of the drivers side sun visor. It warns that you are driving a high centred vehicle that is prone to roll if you abruptly take a sharp turn at speed. Seriously, it's basic physics. If you don't know how to drive an SUV, you shouldn't own an SUV. It's pretty bad when you need your sun visor to teach you basic rules of driving. On a side note. Rule #1 on being a noob. Get your first impressions over with before handing out insults.

Oldraven....don't take this too personally...but your comment on anything less than 6.0MP....in my humble opinion, is ABSOLUTE CRAP <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Have to agree Gaza, my 4 meg cannon S45 has never produced grainy images <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, we're all entitled to our opinions. I didn't say the images were grainy. But have you ever gotten prints made with a lower resolution image? I don't know what to tell you guys. I have personally had this happen. The images look crisp and perfect on my computer, but the prints were drastically different between the two cameras. 3.2 vs. 8.2. Again, this is just my experience.

Actually it wasn't the sidewalls. The tread was seperating from the tire. Both Bridgestone and Ford were fully aware of the faulty tires, but put them on Explorers anyway. And the Taurus is already gone. The Five Hundred has already replaced it. And the Taurus sold extremelly well, for well over a decade. But it was only updated twice in that time, and was left behind by the Chevy Impala (another FWD) and both cars suffered at the hands of the Toyota Camry and Honda Accord. DCX's LX series of RWD's (300, Magnum, Charger) was the final nail in the coffin. Sadly, the 500 comes with an anemic 203hp 3.0L V6. It is available with AWD and a CVT, but most will be a 6-spd auto. They've already stopped trying to market it, after about six months.

Only in the States. America is a pretty big place (two continents and all).

This is another good site for refference. http://www.dcviews.com/cameras.htm http://www.dcviews.com/_kodak/z700.htm

Nice. Lots of DSLR's here I see. The main reason I got the Rebel is the value. I used to use an older Nikon Coolpix 995 3.2. For the money, my Minolta is just as good. The Nikon is a better camera, but for the price hike, I couldn't justify buying it. I looked at the D1S as well, but realised there's no way in hell I'll ever need that much camera. At least not at this time in my life. It was also leverage for convincing the wife that I won't be buying something new in a year. "Dear, if I needed the best, I'd go for 16Mp. So in a few years when they have 20Mp cams, I'm not going to be all over it." So, are you guys hobby photographers, or just enjoy nice toys?

Post your digicam/35mm, or what have you. For a few years now, I've been rockin the vintage 35mm SLR's. After two 70's Milotla XG1 SLR's, (one bought at a flea market for $50, and the other from Ebay for about the same. First with a 1:28 fixed lens and the second had the stock 1:50 fixed) we decided we needed a digital for our vacation back home. So we got a 3.2Mp Minolta Dimage E323. It's a great little camera, and we use it a lot for point and shoot, or vacation photos where all that matters is getting the moment. ($400 a year and a half ago) We pretty much got it for the wedding, because who has time to load film on a day like that? For images that matter, I use an SLR. I like having a choice in what is the focus, Aperature, SS, etc. So whenever we go to the mountains, we take one of the 35mm's. I wanted to get lenses for Christmas last year, so I convinced the wife to let me pick something out on Ebay. It turns out I found a really good deal on an XG9 with a Vivitar f3.5-4.5 28-85mm Macro zoom, a Mitsuki f4 80-200mm zoom, and Sakar 29MZ articulating telescopic flash with cases and skylight filters. ($75. Too bad it cost just as much to ship it from England). It took beautiful pictures, and my options were so lengthy with these new toys. But in August, while on vacation in British Colombia, the light seals came loose while changing a roll. I gave my only remaining good XG1 to my sister, so I was SOL. So the wife let me buy a new camera. I promised her it would be the last one for quite a few years, so she was alright with it. So I finally went all out and got a 8.2Mp Canon Digital Rebel XT. This thing is friggin awesome. I'm still learning new options every time I use it. ($1400 with a 512 CF card) Thank heavens tripods are universal. I'll always be a 35mm man. There's a quality to light hitting a solid medium that can't be replicated digitally. I will eventually get another 35mm some years from now, but for the time being I'm more than occupied with the Rebel.

Actually, that's kind of a misconception. The truth is, most cameras are point and shoot, and it needs to focus and meter light before the snapshot can be taken. If you get a digital SLR, where you have manually made these adjustments, the picture is taken isntantly. And with both, when in auto, the shutter button usually is a two stage. If you hold the button down half way, it will make the adjustments for you, and when you're ready to take the pic, now depress the button all the way. This again is usually instant. If you have red-eye reduction on, there will always be a delay as well. But for sudden action shots, when you don't really have time to do this, you're absolutely right. In this case, the one that can set itself quickest is best. Exactly. Lens gives quality of colour, light, etc. All higher Mp's give you is higher resolution. But if you have a low resolution image, the best lens in the world won't help you at the printer. Time for a new thread, so I don't derail this one.

4.0 effective Mp isn't too shabby. If you're looking for a decent point and shoot, this should be plenty for you. 5X optical zoom isn't the best I've heard, but it's above average for this price. Ignore digital zoom stats. Digital zoom is complete crap, and will give you aweful images. If you plan to print these images at a photo lab (super easy these days) be advised that anything under 6.0Mp will leave you with grainy prints, every time. I can't tell you exactly why that is, but with my 3.2 Minolta this happened quite a bit, even on the highest resolution. I had this confirmed by the camera tech guy when I got my new one. Unless you dabble in photography, this camera should be plenty for you. And $190 is good for a 4.0. I got our 3.2 for more than double that a year and a half ago.

I have that thing in white as my desktop background.

Top Gear is the best auto show on the tube. When they tested the Atom, Clarkson was giggling like a school girl.

You want me to pick one? I've always loved the 427S/C Cobra. The car is too cool, and is damn near frightening when it wakes up. Dream car? Bugatti Veyron. 0-300kph in under 14 seconds. 407kph. 1001hp.

I'm usually not a big fan of painted rims, but these really complete the look of the car. Nice.

Damn. That auction is tailor made for me. Too bad I'm years away from being able to move on this project. Thanks anyway. At least now I know it won't be that impossible to find one when the time comes.

Don't we all? You know, Shelby American still builds them. They're not cheap, but they're genuine. Good luck finding a 60's Cobra for under $200k though.

The first ones. The second set looks too much like Cobra R's, which are on everything that rolls these days.

Perhaps, but Ford would have to be using watch springs to be that weak. It only happened after the tune? Did you ever rev the engine passed 5k before the tune? If it didn't happen before the tune, I'd hardly blame springs. Mind you, I don't know this engine. Just general engine dynamics.

Valve springs? How exactly would that cause a cylinder to drop out? Once the rpm's drop, the valves shouldn't float. This makes absolutely no sense to me. Perhaps your limiter is on the fritz and pulls spark to that cylinder longer than it should.

Yes. I was using heavy sarcasm. Aparently the US is the reason Canada isn't part of Russia (though with our medicare, they think we're commies anyway). Just ask one of them.

Nice. (btw, that was a 16v Volvo head, not 24v. No post edits on this board?)

ReminDs me of the time my wife couldn't get the keys out of the Jeep after she turned it off.

My work desktop. It changes every week or two. And yes, I do need most of those icons.

That is if the brakes were working that day. (says the Chevy truck owner) "YOU HATE FREEDOM! 'MERICA IS TEH REASON your NOT NEW JAPAN!" Awesome. (remember, I'm a Canadian, so take that caps sh*t as a joke)