Here is an interesting article:
(move your mouse in and out the first image.)
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/150-vs-5000-dollar-camera.htm#
Which is better: a $150 camera or a $5000 camera
所有跟帖:
•
It has been concluded that Ken Rockwell is an idiot.
-pieq314-
♀
(80 bytes)
()
12/11/2006 postreply
05:46:39
•
5D的片过爆1/3去比不太公平。不过,我很赞同Ken的结论:
-偶尔贴贴-
♂
(210 bytes)
()
12/11/2006 postreply
07:32:48
•
回复:不过,我很赞同Ken的结论:Not really
-pieq314-
♀
(458 bytes)
()
12/11/2006 postreply
07:43:30
•
come on, Pie. You can surely get these kinds of
-偶尔贴贴-
♂
(69 bytes)
()
12/11/2006 postreply
08:09:08
•
Not for the $150 camera he mentioned.
-pieq314-
♀
(517 bytes)
()
12/11/2006 postreply
08:45:46
•
Come on, Pie. This is not a kid's number game.
-偶尔贴贴-
♂
(429 bytes)
()
12/11/2006 postreply
09:34:33
•
Well, if you increase the budget to around $500 or a little more
-pieq314-
♀
(245 bytes)
()
12/11/2006 postreply
09:50:33
•
:) ...
-偶尔贴贴-
♂
(0 bytes)
()
12/11/2006 postreply
10:10:17
•
On a 2nd thought, Ken Rockwell did state some true here:
-pieq314-
♀
(410 bytes)
()
12/11/2006 postreply
10:19:57
•
读这篇文章使我忍不住的要笑,
-蕊寒香冷-
♀
(865 bytes)
()
12/11/2006 postreply
10:48:49
•
非常赞同竹子的观点。Ken himself made an important point
-U96-
♂
(709 bytes)
()
12/11/2006 postreply
11:36:50
•
鹰有时比鸡飞的低,但鸡永远飞不了象鹰那样高
-九月九-
♂
(166 bytes)
()
12/11/2006 postreply
11:45:08