P3D Re: New RBT X3 List

["Kersenbrock, Michael" <michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Dr. George A. Themelis" wrote:

> That's incorrect too.  The majority of those who expressed an opinion
> supported the combined lists.

Sorry for miscounting.  I may have been confused by 
multiple postings by some people without keeping track
of unique "voters".  This really isn't relevant to
my point however.

Basically, I agreed with your earlier sarcasm about photo-3d
splintering out massive camera groups.  I think they should
"stay" within photo-3d, and this includes the RBT S-1.

Perhaps some may be willing to post something about their S-1
to an S-1 only group that they wouldn't to a larger photo-3d
group.  I don't know why or if this is true, but if true, then 
I think having such a group would be great, especially if I
can lurk there to gather info about the camera.  :-) But if
all other things were equal, I'd rather have those same
postings all posted here instead.  Along with RBT X-3 postings.

> I really do not consider the Realist 45 a "Realist camera".
> The 3.5 and 2.8s and variations are essentially the same camera
> but with different lenses.  The only thing in common between the
> Realist 45 and the David White Realists is the name "Realist".
> The only thing in common between the RBT S1 and other RBT cameras
> is the name "RBT".

You completely agree with me.  The S-1 in respect to an RBT
group is like the 45 in respect to a Realist-only group.

Mike K.

P.S. - Although made by Iloca, the 45 has at least one thing I think
       rare among non-Realists.  That is, its view port is at
       the bottom -- made for forehead stabilization.  One of the things
       I like about Realists.

P.P.S. - I've already gotten the "green light" (for an RBT camera) from 
         she who must be obeyed.  Just haven't fit it into the budget
         (timing wise) as yet.  Nor have I figured out which model.


> 
> George Themelis


------------------------------

End of PHOTO-3D Digest 3218
***************************