Nikon is backwards

On 29/01/2019 17.42, nospam wrote:
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

Or on a drill.

most drills have a reversing switch.


Try to drill in reverse.

To drill a hole is only one function of a power drill. Some are used
more with a screwdriver bit. Inserting and removing screws requires
reversing.

And that needs a different head that is not screwed to the motor shaft,
as some are.

I don't know what you're talking about. A screwdriver bit fits in the
Jacob's chuck of a power drill just like a drill bit fits in one.
Nothing is changed except the bit.

Well, I have drills with a head that is just bolted to the motor shaft,
which is reverse threaded for the purpose. Put them in reverse and head
gets loose and falls off.

https://goo.gl/images/gtc88m

just because your drills won't reverse doesn't mean no drill can.

I just showed you the reason that most motors turn in the same
direction, and it is an historical reason. If other recent hardware is
made differently, that doesn't change things.


next time, get a better drill.

ROTFL! Typical nospam useless answer.


--
Cheers, Carlos.

In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

Or on a drill.

most drills have a reversing switch.


Try to drill in reverse.

To drill a hole is only one function of a power drill. Some are used
more with a screwdriver bit. Inserting and removing screws requires
reversing.

And that needs a different head that is not screwed to the motor shaft,
as some are.

I don't know what you're talking about. A screwdriver bit fits in the
Jacob's chuck of a power drill just like a drill bit fits in one.
Nothing is changed except the bit.

Well, I have drills with a head that is just bolted to the motor shaft,
which is reverse threaded for the purpose. Put them in reverse and head
gets loose and falls off.

https://goo.gl/images/gtc88m

just because your drills won't reverse doesn't mean no drill can.

I just showed you the reason that most motors turn in the same
direction, and it is an historical reason. If other recent hardware is
made differently, that doesn't change things.

yes it does change things.

don't assume that everyone's drill is as limited as yours.

next time, get a better drill.

ROTFL! Typical nospam useless answer.

nope. you chose a non-reversible drill. next time choose one that can.

here's a cheap one for just $20 usd:
https://www.homedepot.com/p/SPEEDWAY...able-Speed-Rev
ersible-Drill-45137/206728251

On 29/01/2019 18.54, nospam wrote:
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

Or on a drill.

most drills have a reversing switch.


Try to drill in reverse.

To drill a hole is only one function of a power drill. Some are used
more with a screwdriver bit. Inserting and removing screws requires
reversing.

And that needs a different head that is not screwed to the motor shaft,
as some are.

I don't know what you're talking about. A screwdriver bit fits in the
Jacob's chuck of a power drill just like a drill bit fits in one.
Nothing is changed except the bit.

Well, I have drills with a head that is just bolted to the motor shaft,
which is reverse threaded for the purpose. Put them in reverse and head
gets loose and falls off.

https://goo.gl/images/gtc88m

just because your drills won't reverse doesn't mean no drill can.

I just showed you the reason that most motors turn in the same
direction, and it is an historical reason. If other recent hardware is
made differently, that doesn't change things.

yes it does change things.

don't assume that everyone's drill is as limited as yours.

Don't assume that everyone's drill is as feature full as yours.

Don't assume that because now you can get them, every body can get them
everywhere, or could get them.


next time, get a better drill.

ROTFL! Typical nospam useless answer.

nope. you chose a non-reversible drill. next time choose one that can.

Are you sure my father could choose back then?
Did you live here then and you didn't tell?
At the time, reversible drills did not exist.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

Or on a drill.

most drills have a reversing switch.


Try to drill in reverse.

To drill a hole is only one function of a power drill. Some are used
more with a screwdriver bit. Inserting and removing screws requires
reversing.

And that needs a different head that is not screwed to the motor shaft,
as some are.

I don't know what you're talking about. A screwdriver bit fits in the
Jacob's chuck of a power drill just like a drill bit fits in one.
Nothing is changed except the bit.

Well, I have drills with a head that is just bolted to the motor shaft,
which is reverse threaded for the purpose. Put them in reverse and head
gets loose and falls off.

https://goo.gl/images/gtc88m

just because your drills won't reverse doesn't mean no drill can.

I just showed you the reason that most motors turn in the same
direction, and it is an historical reason. If other recent hardware is
made differently, that doesn't change things.

yes it does change things.

don't assume that everyone's drill is as limited as yours.

Don't assume that everyone's drill is as feature full as yours.

Don't assume that because now you can get them, every body can get them
everywhere, or could get them.

of course everyone can get them. reversible drills are not new and have
been available for many, many years.

they're cheap too. usd $20:
https://www.homedepot.com/p/SPEEDWAY...able-Speed-Rev
ersible-Drill-45137/206728251

next time, get a better drill.

ROTFL! Typical nospam useless answer.

nope. you chose a non-reversible drill. next time choose one that can.

Are you sure my father could choose back then?
Did you live here then and you didn't tell?
At the time, reversible drills did not exist.

so what?

his father probably had a hand drill, because motorized drills didn't
exist.

what matters is what's available *now*.

On 29/01/2019 19.50, nospam wrote:
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

Or on a drill.

most drills have a reversing switch.


Try to drill in reverse.

To drill a hole is only one function of a power drill. Some are used
more with a screwdriver bit. Inserting and removing screws requires
reversing.

And that needs a different head that is not screwed to the motor shaft,
as some are.

I don't know what you're talking about. A screwdriver bit fits in the
Jacob's chuck of a power drill just like a drill bit fits in one.
Nothing is changed except the bit.

Well, I have drills with a head that is just bolted to the motor shaft,
which is reverse threaded for the purpose. Put them in reverse and head
gets loose and falls off.

https://goo.gl/images/gtc88m

just because your drills won't reverse doesn't mean no drill can.

I just showed you the reason that most motors turn in the same
direction, and it is an historical reason. If other recent hardware is
made differently, that doesn't change things.

yes it does change things.

don't assume that everyone's drill is as limited as yours.

Don't assume that everyone's drill is as feature full as yours.

Don't assume that because now you can get them, every body can get them
everywhere, or could get them.

of course everyone can get them. reversible drills are not new and have
been available for many, many years.

Not then, not here.

So?

Again, that's the reason that most motors were made to turn the same
direction. Long time ago. Now, it is the tradition.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:31:49 -0000, wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 23:51:57 -0000, wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:09:06 -0000, wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 01:27:46 -0000, wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 01:06:44 -0000, wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 00:19:11 -0000, wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 22:52:38 -0000, newshound
wrote:

On 27/01/2019 22:32, Commander Kinsey wrote:
https://www.nickcarverphotography.co...-is-backwards/

Now I know it's not just me that's annoyed by this. In fact more than
annoyed, I once BROKE a Nikon camera I'd rented, costing me £200, simply
by trying to attach the lens in the correct clockwise manner. The
rental company was not amused.

Agree with you about the bayonet, but FWIW the Fuji zoom goes the same
way as the Nikon. Clockwise is the positive direction, going out.

Never had a Fuji DSLR, but I won't be buying Fuji since two compact
cameras I bought have nowhere near the MP they claim.

Which compact cameras,

The Finepix S1000FD and the similar one made before that which claimed 6MP.

and you know this how?

By looking at the pictures they produced obviously.

Looking at the pictures they produced will not tell you anything about the
sensor, or its specs.

WTF is the point in them telling me what the sensor can do if the output
image isn't as good as that? I don't care if it's the sensor or the lens
or something else that limits it. I expect an image worthy of the MP it claims.

A more thorough examination of the image files is going to be needed.

Yip, did that. I get about 25% of the MP Fuji quote. Canon gives
100%. Sony gives 80%.

Besides, you are talking about a long defunct camera.

I don't care, they made two cameras that lied about their output. Every
time I've had a Canon, it produced what it said on the tin.


You should check on the capability of the current generation of Fujifilm
mirrorless cameras.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xwwov7yanz74rem/DSF6645R1E3.jpg

What model is that taken with?


X-T2 with the XF 55-200mm lens.

Your image is only 6MP, the camera states 24MP. Have you a full size version?

I try to be considerate of broadband usage for folks on the receiving end
by down sizing files for sharing.

Nobody has limited bandwidth nowadays surely? I'm in Scotland and even I
have 54Mbits/sec, unlimited usage. Your 24MP version took only 3.5
seconds to download. It's nothing compared to the HD films I download.

While I have the RAW files at home, I am
currently traveling (Lomé, Togo, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, and Cape Town,
South Africa),

That sounds fun!

and I only have my iPad Pro with me. However, For the
pixelpeeker in you I have dug up, a still resized version at 13MP which was
tucked away in my cloud files.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/f0rlowfnnqomm4h/DSF6645R1E1.jpg

Actually that's 24MP. And unlike my Fuji output, when viewed at 100%
it's still sharp, so I guess that camera is actually decent quality.


Actually it is decent quality, as are the entire current range of Fujifilm
mirrorless cameras. So much so that I now have four Fujifilm bodies, and my
current primary camera is an X-T3.

You should check on a few reviews, and opinions from working photographers
using them.

https://keithwee.com/portfolio/review-of-the-fujifilm-x-t3-refinements-towards-perfection-and-that-zero-black-out-30-fps/
https://www.macleanphotographic.com/fujifilm-xt3/
https://jonasraskphotography.com/2018/09/06/fujifilm-x-t3-review-next-generation-x/
http://bryanminear.com/the-empire-strikes-back-xt3/

So have Fuji started making better cameras? Or is it just their compact ones that are rubbish?

...and just to show that a little compression, and downsizing when it comes
to online sharing is usually irrelevant, here is another downsized shot for
you to peek at.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dh8q323iuyle153/DSCF6922-E2.jpg

Depends what you want to do with it. Downsizing means you can't zoom in
on specific parts, and displaying it large makes it fuzzy.

On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:48:35 -0000, David B. "David wrote:

On 29/01/2019 00:32, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:13:17 -0000, David B. "David
wrote:

On 28/01/2019 23:51, Savageduck wrote:
Bill W wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 08:07:48 +0000, "David B." "David
wrote:

On 28/01/2019 01:27, Savageduck wrote:
Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 01:06:44 -0000, wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 00:19:11 -0000, wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 22:52:38 -0000, newshound
wrote:

On 27/01/2019 22:32, Commander Kinsey wrote:
https://www.nickcarverphotography.co...-is-backwards/

Now I know it's not just me that's annoyed by this. In
fact more than
annoyed, I once BROKE a Nikon camera I'd rented, costing me
£200, simply
by trying to attach the lens in the correct clockwise
manner. The
rental company was not amused.

Agree with you about the bayonet, but FWIW the Fuji zoom
goes the same
way as the Nikon. Clockwise is the positive direction, going
out.

Never had a Fuji DSLR, but I won't be buying Fuji since two
compact
cameras I bought have nowhere near the MP they claim.

Which compact cameras,

The Finepix S1000FD and the similar one made before that which
claimed 6MP.

and you know this how?

By looking at the pictures they produced obviously.

Looking at the pictures they produced will not tell you anything
about the
sensor, or its specs.

WTF is the point in them telling me what the sensor can do if the
output
image isn't as good as that? I don't care if it's the sensor or
the lens
or something else that limits it. I expect an image worthy of
the MP it claims.

A more thorough examination of the image files is going to be
needed.

Yip, did that. I get about 25% of the MP Fuji quote. Canon gives
100%. Sony gives 80%.

Besides, you are talking about a long defunct camera.

I don't care, they made two cameras that lied about their
output. Every
time I've had a Canon, it produced what it said on the tin.


You should check on the capability of the current generation of
Fujifilm
mirrorless cameras.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xwwov7yanz74rem/DSF6645R1E3.jpg

I love the image of YOU in his helmet!

Be afraid, Duck, be very afraid...


I have ceased direct communication with that particular individual.

Did you get cross with me just for disclosing that you are now bald?

https://www.dropbox.com/s/sj9k2zo0yz...06.06.png?dl=0


Baldness, and excess body hair, are indicative of insufficient evolution.

I'll have to take your word on that!

Whoops, you're bald aren't you? Too many hormones that is.

Or was it something else?

It was 20 years ago yesterday that I had to put my elderly yellow
Labrador to sleep so that I could make arrangements for the funeral of
my son. It was a double whammy - as a dog lover yourself you'll
appreciate that.

I couldn't have done that. I'd have had to find someone to look after
the dog. The only time I ever put an animal to sleep was one of my cats
which begged me to put him out of his misery. He was 17 years old and
gradually lost strength, he started collapsing a lot. When he woke me
at 4 in the morning whining like crazy, staring at me, and raising his
paw in the air for help, I ended it for him.

Leo was 17 years of age and already on his very last legs. I'd been in
touch with my vet about 10 days beforehand to ask if he would come to my
house when I deemed that the deed had to be done. Leo was too poorly to
be left in the care of somebody else. It broke my heart to do it.

I'm saddened to hear that you had to kill your cat. :-(

He was one of many. But he was like a grandfather to the rest, he'd even play with the kittens. I was given him a few years beforehand by a customer, as his wife had suddenly become allergic to cats when she got pregnant!

Your photographs are of superb quality when viewed on my 27 inch iMac!

Argh! A Mac user!

'Fraid so! Best thing since sliced bread as they say! ;-)

Ugh, overpriced shiny incompatible rubbish. I've taken great delight in converting many people to PCs.

I also use a dual boot Laptop (Windows 10 and Linux Mint) and an aged
Dell Dimension desktop with XP and Linux.

I've never seen the point in anything but Windows - it's easiest to use and most compatible as almost everyone has it. And there's far more programs for it.

I've also still got my original Dell I bought in 1998. It has a virgin
copy of Windows 98 on it but it is not connected to the Internet.

98 sux. Can't you force it to at least take 2000?

On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:56:58 -0000, David B. "David wrote:

On 29/01/2019 00:34, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:24:24 -0000, David B. "David
wrote:
[....]
He has nothing to fear from me, I assure you - and him! ;-)

Correct, you strike me as a big cuddly gentleman ;-)

Thank you - a bit TOO big, but losing pounds slowly since I stopped
drinking alcohol on the 21st March last year - the first day of spring!

I dislike avoiding things I enjoy, like alcohol and chocolate. If I
need to lose weight, I exercise more or eat less, but the same things.

It's easy to say and do whilst you're just a young lad! ;-)

It's easier to eat less than to eat different. I can still enjoy what I want to eat, but just have slightly less of it. And I much prefer eating the same and exercising more, than eating less or healthier.

One thing that can burn thousands of calories is being cold. You can use between 400 and 1600 calories per hour just by being chilly, on top of what you're burning through exercise. So if you go swimming in a cold lake, you lose a lot of weight.

They tried to make me into a gentleman at BRNC Dartmouth. I only
attended elocution lessons because it meant I could miss a session of
drill on the parade ground! ;-)

Elocution lessons for the Navy ROTFPMSL!

Not funny at all! ;-) Naval Officers usually speak the Queen's English!

What do you think of the slogan "Join the Navy, feel a man!"

At least I lost my Kentish accent.

Is this your accent? I would say he doesn't have an accent at all: https://youtu.be/Qj4MFlhDujc

https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/our-org...brnc-dartmouth

I served a full five year apprenticeship as an Artificer before I joined
the college.

Ah so you can fix my car then.

Probably! We all did basic engineering for the first year, then
specialised thereafter. My own field was Control Engineering - mostly
electronics but some heavy electrical and hydraulic work too.

Bet you can't fix a Renault. All this bloody modern computer **** they put in them nowadays, and the French are useless at electrics.

On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 04:21:01 -0000, Eric Stevens wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:01:59 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 23:41:31 -0000, Ron C wrote:

On 1/28/2019 5:15 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 21:47:37 -0000, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 16:52:38 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 15:46:24 -0000, Tony Cooper
wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 08:16:09 +0000, "David B." "David
wrote:

On 28/01/2019 00:20, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 23:03:04 -0000, RichA
wrote:

On Sunday, 27 January 2019 17:32:41 UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
https://www.nickcarverphotography.co...-is-backwards/

Now I know it's not just me that's annoyed by this. In fact more
than annoyed, I once BROKE a Nikon camera I'd rented, costing me
£200, simply by trying to attach the lens in the correct clockwise
manner. The rental company was not amused.

The bayonet is fine if you never go from one system to another and
back, but it grates if you do.

Not for me. Everything in life tightens to the right. Taps, screws,
etc, etc. Having to do one thing the other way simply will never
work
for me. It's one of those things I expect to be intuitive. If I
want
to tighten something, it goes clockwise. If that snaps a fragile
component inside the camera, I'll never buy their product again.

On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 13:19:27 -0000, Alan Browne wrote:

On 2019-01-28 18:59, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 23:27:13 -0000, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2019-01-28 18:11, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 23:06:55 -0000, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2019-01-28 16:49, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 18:01:55 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"

And for some reason motors must spin a certain way?

It's standard. If a motor rotated the other way no doubt you would
complain about it.

US, UK/Italy/Germany/Japan manufactured helicopters generally have
rotors turn CW (viewed from below).

So do French and Russian ... when viewed from above. ;-)

The French always have to be different. Take my Renault for example, it
refuses to give the error codes to any OBD device except a Renault one.
OBD is supposed to be a standard. I've had to buy a pirate Renault Clip
interface (£85 - the real one is £4000, hence most garages don't have
one) to get the data so I can fix it. I will absolutely not pay a
Renault main dealer just to find a fault.

Renault's sold in North America would be obligated by law to spit out
their OBD's w/o need for a hacked interface.
Legal requirement for cars made and sold 1996+.

Same in Europe. But OBD doesn't seem to legally require much above
emissions testing. All the more important stuff like ABS failure,
engine failure, they don't care about.

Here (North America) trouble codes go to all manner of component issues.

Same here, but manufacturers are not using the same codes as each other, so to get the code, you need an expensive manufacturer specific reader, it's absurd. I'm hoping my pirate Renault Clip interface (for £85 instead of£4000) will tell me what's wrong.

OTOH, most sane people avoid Renault like the plague.

I avoid them too. But when I bought it, similarly priced cars were
double the mileage, half the size, and half the power. I guess that's
indicative of everyone avoiding them. I'm surprised they're still in
business, they should have gone under like Rover.

They are not qualified for Quebec winters by any measure.

They can't handle the heat either. My last Renault seized the engine
when it overheated in .... FRANCE!

The linked article suggests that they will take another kick at the can
in promoting their trash in North America:
http://loutardeliberee.com/voitures-...er-de-nouveau/

I thought half of Canada was French folk?

1/5 ish French speaking.

Ship them back over to France where they belong!

Garages here no longer charge to read OBD because there are many devices
available on the market.

Indeed - but the Brits are gullible and throw money at garages. I've
reported two of my local garages to Trading Standards for malpractice..
One tried to charge me £165 for a £55 part.

Last time I was at Honda for an airbag recall
(10 years ago),

Pah! You can ignore recalls you know.

Ignore an airbag safety recall? That would be absolutely stupid.

Just disconnect it. A Haynes manual will tell you how.

the "tech" told me there were additional codes but he
wouldn't tell me w/o paying a fee. And then I found the other codes
printed on my $0 invoice. I guess someone screwed up. I don't know how
they treat customers these days in that respect.

I avoid Honda ever since my ABS failed and the two sensors were £160
each. There were no 3rd party alternatives. I managed to get them for
£110 each by getting an American friend to buy them then post them over
to me in the UK! My next car was a VW. Same problem, failed ABS
sensor, only £12 for a genuine part, £5 for a fake. Honda can kiss my ass.

Honda's are amongst the best value cars there are. My Honda Accord is
16 years old this year. Looking to buy a new one this March/April.

But when they break they cost too much for the parts.