A question..

[splitimageview]

The original article is not sufficiently worthy of such bickering. 😉

 

[crawdiddy]

As a socio-linguist I feel obliged to point out that technically 'native' English is the version of the language spoken where-ever you are, whatever version that is. The country with the largest number of 'native' English speakers in the world right now is neither the UK or USA, it's India 🙂

India has the most native English speakers?

Well, I'm no socio-linguist, but I believe the term "native English" implies speakers who are born into, or grow up in a culture where English is spoken as the primary language, or at least one of the primary languages, and that the language is spoken with fluency by a significant percentage of the population.

While there are many persons in India with English skills, of various degrees of mastery, English is not the primary language, and I certainly don't think a significant percentage of Indians speak fluent English. You said the country with the largest number of native English speakers is India. There are about a billion people in India (that's a thousand million, if you're from the U.K.) There are approximately 350 million people in the U.S. and Canada (remember them? I said North America in my original post, not the USA.) Some of them may speak Spanish or French or Mandarin, etc. as a primary language. But let's say there are 330 million native English speakers in North America. Are you saying that more than 330 million Indians speak English fluently, as their native language? One third of the population? I seriously doubt it.

 

[J J Kapsberger]

The original article is not sufficiently worthy of such bickering.

That about says it. The article's a waste of server space. The guy might be a good photographer (provided he's not using a rangefinder it seems) but he doesn't write a good online article.

 

[Avotius]

I think that if I cant shoot a 50mm at 2-2.8 on a r2a out on the streets and have perfect focus I would tend to think its just a learning curve thing. After looking at that article its easy for someone who is not used to a rf to ask why in the hell would anyone bother, but yeah, learning curve, either it works or it doesnt.

That said I would still buy one.

 

[MikeL]

I think it's interesting how everyone sees what they want in the article. I saw he enjoyed using the camera, the experience and images were different and special to him, it's a nice change from his other gear. Others saw all the negative stuff.

 

[MikeL]

Fred, the writer isn't discovering greatness in something difficult to master. He's a stereotype of someone in the throws of object lust! 🙂

Well, I'm all for people buying stuff that makes them happy. And an M8 with a Noc attached will certainly impress his friends.

I checked out his website, and I don't think he needs an M8 or Noctilux to impress his friends. Sitemistic, does it make you feel better about yourself to say stuff like this or something?

 

[ferider]

The key to the article is the phrase about Pamela Anderson.

Not any different than many Leica threads on RFF, check out
"Leica and Ferrari" for instance.

Roland.

 

[splitimageview]

Perhaps the article was originarry penned by by Kim Jong Il and then transrated.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apyB93-1FHk

I'm So Ronery
So ronery
So ronery and sadry arone

There's no one
Just me onry
Sitting on my rittle throne
I work rearry hard and make up great prans
But nobody ristens, no one understands
Seems like no one takes me serirousry

And so I'm ronery
A rittle ronery
Poor rittle me

There's nobody
I can rerate to
Feel rike a bird in a cage
It's kinda sihry
But not rearry
Because it's fihring my body with rage

I'm the smartest most crever most physicarry fit
But nobody else seems to rearize it
When I change the world maybe they'll notice me
But until then I'rr just be ronery
Rittle ronery, poor rittle me

I'm so ronery