Looking for camera to lure girlfriend into photography

[Derrel]

Sometimes misunderstandings can occur...

 

[Gavjenks]

Derrel, I work in a psych department. That usually IS what I expect people around me mean when they say that. Cheap bastards are always trying to save on participant reimbursement expenses.

 

[pixmedic]

<img src="http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=68014"/>

Sometimes misunderstandings can occur...

Those are called wedding vows.

 

[EIngerson]

Good lord you people are so up tight. Limr, statements like "my boyfriend got back into photography because of me." Kind of support what I was saying. Lol

Just because I don't use cute little smilies doesn't mean I'm serious about every word I type.

 

[EIngerson]

Dude you just did it again in the very next post >.>

Lol On purpose. I hope I have time in between getting my adult diapers changed to say I told you so.

 

[Gavjenks]

I certainly won't begrudge any diapered men their hypothetical satisfaction, I'll give you that.

 

[limr32 1]

Good lord you people are so up tight. Limr, statements like "my boyfriend got back into photography because of me." Kind of support what I was saying. Lol

I'm sorry, now I'm uptight because I am disagreeing with your position that women are conniving and sneaky?

How does this support what you are saying? I didn't trick him into being interested, or insist, or leave sly little hints here or there. If he stayed with his digital cameras or didn't like photography at all, so what? We don't have to share everything, but this one we do. But apparently, 'wives' don't want to do anything their husbands want to do, especially not photography. But why not photography? Sometimes it's the woman who's interested first and then her boyfriend/husband gets interested, as a few have already pointed out. And that's what happened to me.

 

[table1349]

Geeez. The more I read this thread, the more Sheldon and Amy Farah Fowler sound normal.

 

[EIngerson]

I'm sorry, now I'm uptight because I am disagreeing with your position that women are conniving and sneaky? How does this support what you are saying? I didn't trick him into being interested, or insist, or leave sly little hints here or there. If he stayed with his digital cameras or didn't like photography at all, so what? We don't have to share everything, but this one did work out. But apparently, 'wives' don't want to do anything their husbands want to do, especially not photography. But why not photography? Sometimes it's the woman who's interested first and then her boyfriend/husband gets interested, as a few have already pointed out. Okay. No tongue in your cheek then. You actually believe it's all a game, then? And that every relationship is going to follow that pattern? You can mean it all you want, but it's still wrong. Here's my upfront, non-sneaky, straight up opinion right here: you're talking out of your ass.

Lol!!! take it how you want. I'm good with standing behind everything I said.

 

[EIngerson]

I certainly won't begrudge any diapered men their hypothetical satisfaction, I'll give you that.

Lol, I'll take it where I can get it. Gav, that was honestly the first time I've seen you let go. Thanks for that. And a good jab too. I enjoy idle banter like that.

 

[limr32 1]

I'm sorry, now I'm uptight because I am disagreeing with your position that women are conniving and sneaky? How does this support what you are saying? I didn't trick him into being interested, or insist, or leave sly little hints here or there. If he stayed with his digital cameras or didn't like photography at all, so what? We don't have to share everything, but this one did work out. But apparently, 'wives' don't want to do anything their husbands want to do, especially not photography. But why not photography? Sometimes it's the woman who's interested first and then her boyfriend/husband gets interested, as a few have already pointed out. Okay. No tongue in your cheek then. You actually believe it's all a game, then? And that every relationship is going to follow that pattern? You can mean it all you want, but it's still wrong. Here's my upfront, non-sneaky, straight up opinion right here: you're talking out of your ass.

Lol!!! take it how you want. I'm good with standing behind everything I said.

Interesting turn of phrase there. You're good standing behind what comes out of your own ass.

You may have noticed that I redacted that part of my post because I misread. But perhaps I didn't misread after all. If you really truly believe that of women, then I kind of feel sorry for you. And if you are actually proud of believing those things about women, then I don't feel so sorry for you anymore.

 

[robbins.photo]

Well if your still in the market one other recommendation to look at would be the Panasonic FZ-70. I owned an FZ200 for a while and it took pretty good pictures for a bridge camera, I always got better results from it than I did the SX50. The SX40 would be hard to beat price wise but the FZ-70 I think would give better image quality over all, both should be small enough to fit in a purse.

 

[ratssass]

Good lord you people are so up tight. Limr, statements like "my boyfriend got back into photography because of me." Kind of support what I was saying. Lol

I'm sorry, now I'm uptight because I am disagreeing with your position that women are conniving and sneaky?

How does this support what you are saying? I didn't trick him into being interested, or insist, or leave sly little hints here or there. If he stayed with his digital cameras or didn't like photography at all, so what? We don't have to share everything, but this one we do. But apparently, 'wives' don't want to do anything their husbands want to do, especially not photography. But why not photography? Sometimes it's the woman who's interested first and then her boyfriend/husband gets interested, as a few have already pointed out. And that's what happened to me.

I think it's just soooooooo adorable when you get that fire in your eyes,sugar.......now be a sweet thing,and make me a sammich,huh?

 

[limr32 1]

Good lord you people are so up tight. Limr, statements like "my boyfriend got back into photography because of me." Kind of support what I was saying. Lol

I'm sorry, now I'm uptight because I am disagreeing with your position that women are conniving and sneaky?

How does this support what you are saying? I didn't trick him into being interested, or insist, or leave sly little hints here or there. If he stayed with his digital cameras or didn't like photography at all, so what? We don't have to share everything, but this one we do. But apparently, 'wives' don't want to do anything their husbands want to do, especially not photography. But why not photography? Sometimes it's the woman who's interested first and then her boyfriend/husband gets interested, as a few have already pointed out. And that's what happened to me.

I think it's just soooooooo adorable when you get that fire in your eyes,sugar.......now be a sweet thing,and make me a sammich,huh?

Aw, darlin', don't you remember the last time you ate a sammich I made for you? If you're lucky, I'll leave the toilet paper in the bathroom this time :bigangel:

 

[EIngerson]

Interesting turn of phrase there. You're good standing behind what comes out of your own ass. You may have noticed that I redacted that part of my post because I misread. But perhaps I didn't misread after all. If you really truly believe that of women, then I kind of feel sorry for you. And if you are actually proud of believing those things about women, then I don't feel so sorry for you anymore.

Well., I didn't catch that you removed a bit so, sorry for that. But there's a bit of putting words in my mouth there. Which, after your comment is much better than standing behind my words perhaps. Be that as it may, relax and don't take everything on the internet as a personal attack. Your keyboard will thank you.