anime52k8

there's nothing a prequel can do that hasn't already been done by Alien3; Resurrection and those awful AVP movies.

personally I like it better where you don't know anything about who/what the space jockey is and why his ship is full of alien eggs. I like not knowing anything outside of the here and now, it adds to the isolated feeling of the movie. I don't really need to know where the aliens come from just like I don't need to know how the thing got frozen in Antarctica. It kind of ruins a movie when they start watering it down with lots of sequels and prequels and other expanded universe crap, just look at the matrix.

why can I not stop myself from reading that in F'ing William Shatners voice? (btw, that little monologe aways buged the crap out of me. why are there ships on fire if presumably they're in space? There's no oxygen in space. And where/what exactly is the Tannhauser Gate? and what the hell is a C-beam for that matter?)

still a little bit more than amiami ended up being. I got a payment request last night, 14000 yen exactly (about 156 dollars). their regular shipping is expensive though, there email said shipping+handling was reguarlerly 4560 yen (nearly 50 bucks) but they had half off shipping.

haha, you funny

Ok, some do have very good glass, but once you start to see good optical quality the weight/size/cost advantage starts to get really marginal. a perfect example is canons EF-S 17-55mm. That lens is optically as good as an L lens in the same focal range, but it also cost about the same as those L lenses and isn't any smaller. It is lighter, but that's because it's mostly plastic (and not weather sealed). and like I said, even the nicest lenses will have some distortion/vignetting/edge softness, around the periphery of there image circle. with a normal lens on a crop body, the outer edge gets cropped out, with a cropped lens it doesn't. then there's the obvious lack of comparability if you do want to go full frame latter (or if you want to have both) basically, except for getting super wide angle lenses, I don't see them being worth it.

thanks, I kind of figured that out a while ago...

Hard to say, it would be nice though. less painting all around. I find it odd that they actually released the Wild weasel with Naomi's gun sniper considering she never used it in the whole show. personally I'd love to see a Lina special with the wild weasel and 2 of the Gatling guns from the Schubaltz saber tiger. I think they can call it the coolest thing ever made.

also the VF-25 has nothing in common with the SV-51 except for the hip guns. the VF-27 has slightly more in common (hip guns 3 toed feet and the both come in purple.) almost all the similarities are purely cosmetic, and in the real world are just a product of the same guy designing all of them and having certain design elements he liked using at the time. in universe it could most likely be explained that there's only so many ways to build an aircraft, and designers tend to come to similar solutions to similar problems

because most of the "lighter smaller and cheaper" comes from low-end construction and glass. And they show more barrel distortion, vignetting and corner/edge softening than comparable normal lenses on a crop body.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years%27_War 1337 to 1453 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punic_wars 264 to 146 BC and the crusades lasted about 200 years if you want to just lump all of them together.

yeah, my dad bought it new in 1986, drove it for 22 years and then gave it to me with only 72,000 miles on it. would have been nice if it was an 87 with a turbo, but you can't have everything.

DX lenses suck anyways, so do EF-S lenses. Other than for making extremely wide angle lenses to compensate for the crop factor, I don't see why you would want a lens with a short back focus. the ones that produce good images don't provide any real weight/size/cost savings and the ones that do are junk. And even on the good ones your taking away one of the best attributes of a conventional lens on a crop body: that it does crop out the outer most 40% of the image circle where you tend get all the distortion/vignetting/loss of focus/etc. personally I like crop bodies, it's nice having the equivalent of a 1.6x teleconverter without the vignetting or 1-stop loss of maximum aperture.

I don't think it's the kit-makers who don't care (they went to the trouble of making a well endowed pilot sculpt after all) it's just the box designers.

we might but we just don't care enough. (everyone in my family drives a toyota, I know mines not (86' supra, little bit to old) and we really haven't bothered to check the other two (IS250 and a highlander).

yes, but I assume he didn't take the picture himself. (and if you're implying something different, then you lost me. )

Fist, I never contradicted your statement. You stated that the legs on the VF-27 toy are in the same place as on the VF-25 toy, I said that it (the legs) being in that place (on the toy) is about where it should be, then in my second post I explained my assessment after you completely misinterpreted what I had said in my first post. And my point is that the implications in this thread that the legs are in the wrong spot and as inaccurate as the VF-25 toys generally overstated and that the discrepancy that you see (between the rendering and the toy) are the fault of a completely different problem (it's not the leg placement or the crotch size, it's the angle the crotch is at). Further, any discrepancy between the toy and the CG model in terms of placement and size are acceptable considering the compromises needed to convert an animation model to a toy. Other toys make bigger compromises, and I stand by my assertion that expecting an absolutely perfect translation is unrealistic. Nice straw man by the way. at what point did I attempt to present that picture "irrefutable proof" of anything?(hit: never) I posted the CG rendering to better illustrate my position that the legs on the VF-27 sit high on the crotch block (in the CG model), higher than the legs on the VF-25 do. Posting the CG rendering was completely unrelated to my latter statement about the comparative accuracy of the DX and model kit. however I will say that the DX is MORE accurate(note: more ancurate not completely accurate, just more accurate) than the Model kit. (which puts the leg half way down the undersized crotch, leaving a large gap between the top of the leg and the bottom of the chest, despite how elongated the intakes are.) (

where did you get that, something just looks... off about it. the markings (51 on the nose, intake warning etc...) look strange, kind of distorted and crooked. it almost looks like they just photo shopped the colors and markings onto the photos from the test flight.

Hikaru looks a little out of place amongst all those Max valks.

In the CG the legs on the VF-27 sit higher up than the legs on the VF-25 IN THE CG. So on the DX TOY the legs of the VF-25 are too high but the VF-27 is just about right. Also the crotch isn't "Gigantic." the legs may be a little high and the crotch a little large, but only to the point where you'd need to be completely anal retentive to care. The only problem that I see is that the crotch doesn't angle out enough (which I've been bothered by since the first promo shots). if it did angle out more it would look perfect, but as is it's not bad and worlds better than the DX-25. (and a hell of a lot better than the Model kit with it's ugly stretched-out torso.)

I'm not sure what you're getting at.

which is how it's supposed to be. which is how it's supposed to be. seriously, this was covered way back when the very first pics of the DX 27 showed up in this thread, the 27's legs connect higher up on the crotch block than the 25's do.

the extended cut of Bladerunner without the voice-over sucks. personally I like 2001 and Alien better but bladerunner is up there.

I torrented it specifically because it's a blatant fan service anime, although I never got around to watching anything but the first episode. one thing I never figured out is how do you pronounce the name of the show? is it go-dannar or god-annar?

awesome, want!