CanoNikkor Lens Snobbery

I'm considering pledging money to a KickStarter project being promoted presumably by a Canadian company in an area of Canada that uses English as the native language. The product is a magnetic device designed to conveniently manage the use of lens caps and to prevent their loss.

You only have to get to the second sentence on their web site published in a large font to see that they are telling you that, with their product, you no longer have to fuss with bags. Yet a canvas bag is included as part of their product package. It's not possible to order their product without receiving their bag.

Immediately above the presentation of their FAQ at the web site, they claim that they have left nothing to chance. They go into great detail providing the examples that prove their point. Yet that supposed attention to every detail is contradicted by the fact that their FAQ, which contains only seven questions, includes a question that is missing a word. It is also contradicted by the issue pertaining to their bag.

I'm considering pledging money to this KickStarter campaign. If it weren't for those two slip-ups, I would have pledged money to the campaign immediately upon reviewing their web site. Instead, I've been thinking a day about it wondering what other slip-ups are hidden from me that might be a lot more important.

This will be my last post on this subject of evaluating web sites, as I don't believe I can add anything else helpful to clarify my thinking, especially for those who would call me prejudiced because of my thinking.

This is the KickStarter web site.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Buckley

This will be my last post on this subject of evaluating web sites, as I don't believe I can add anything else helpful to those who would call me prejudiced in my thinking.

---

It's OK Mike, I'm sure a lot of employers are also prejudiced against prospective employees who turn up late, in dirty clothing, and malodourous. How dare they take presentation into account when evaluating someone! ;)

Next time I need a quality product or service I'll be sure to ignore any plethora of mistakes on their website - I'm sure I can believe them when they assure me that they're the best! If any competing product costs more then it can only be because we're paying for the name. Only low cost products from error-ridden websites for me from now on!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Buckley

the quality of their communication is poor when it's very clear by the size of the company

---

Mike,

My native tongue is not English, my very good old English friend will tell you, that sentence should read: “the quality of their communication is poor, WHILST it's very clear by the size of the company,”

Should I make a statement: "Mike cannot take proper pictures because he cannot write proper English"? Is it fair, judging the ability of someone else by the minor mistakes they make in translating and writing a foreign language?

I cannot find any reason to gun Tokina down, on grounds of language errors, as my English is rather poor. Maybe I have some understanding and appreciation for people and companies trying to express themselves, using a foreign language. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

Micro 4/3 cameras are for children; here's the proof

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRzcCYSg_vA

---

LOL a lot walked out of the door and then the silly man mentioned panasonic.

Given the likely price of those lenses they must be extremely rich children. There is a guy on luminouslandscape that has kitted himself out with an Oly camera for when he flies some where -baggage allowances - the idiot's using some panasonic lenses. Probably because they use bigger plastic as Olympus did on 4/3.

John
-

Okay folks. This has now crossed the boundary and has become far too personal. I think it best that everyone calls it a day in this thread.