Re: (QUESTAR) Re: The Leica of... Questars.... off-topic

[Fred Ward <fward@erols.com>]

And this is the way the list drifts..... further and further off topic.

Well, once or twice a year I honestly believe I can make a contribution
to the Leica list and post a personal experience. And then the NET s
unique ability to be petty and to fine-tune character assassination
leaps into action.

I posted a message about my experiences with a Questar telescope a long
time ago. I posted it to the Leica list because that is the only list
that had the Questar thread going and it is the list I care about. If I
wanted to be on the Questar list or post on it, I would do so. I posted
it here... and Marc James Small lifted it without asking me and posted
it onto the Questar list, where it was assured to attract a barrage of
negative responses. And one diatribe at least was posted there, and Marc
thoughtfully lifted the personal attack on me from the Questar list to
share with all of us. 

I would like to see this thread end. This list does not deserve having
thoughtful personal experiences posted when they end like this. Who
wants to spend his time sharing so pin-heads can blast away. 

As for the Mr. Gibbons attack on me:

I know a great deal about what I was speaking of. I visited Questar,
introduced myself by describing the photographic use I intended for the
Questar. There was no misunderstanding about my purpose. Then when I
came back for the solar filter, I also described that this was purely
for a photographic use, for a solar eclipse. 

1. The early Questar electric drives were less than accurate. Of course
you have to make adjustments for multiple-hour exposures. That is NOT
what I was making. Even Questar admitted the old drives were not
accurate and changed them.

2. We have truth in advertising laws here, and Questar was then
advertising f/stops. What was advertised and what was printed was not
so. When Mr. Gibbons refers to my <complete ignorance> he makes a
quantum leap into hyperspace without knowing anything about me and
apparently not knowing what he is talking about. Questar was advertising
and promoting superior quality... which included a printed f/stop and
the assurance that this was a quality optic for photography. It was far
slower than advertised, and it had vignetting that I found excessive. I
knew how the telescope was constructed, and that was beside the point.
The company was promising one thing and delivering another. 

3. Mr. Gibbons is once again totally off-base with his comment about
shutter bounce and mirror slap causing the double images. Get your facts
straight, Mr. Gibbons, before you start your month flapping. I used a
Nikon F with the mirror locked up, and Questar itself agreed that the
double image was caused by its faulty solar filter.

And saying my reporting all this to Questar was <complaining> and
<pathetic> is ridiculous. 

And Mr. Gibbons, if you ever see this, please keep your offensive and
totally inappropriate comments locked in your universitiy lab and out of
my life. I never wrote to you or to your list. And if you would open
your mind instead of your mouth, it is possible that you might learn
something. I am sick of the quickness-to-attack attitude that is ruining
the NET for me instead would like to see a willingness to discuss and
learn that could make this forum valuable.  

Fred Ward