Reading mode: Light Dark

Canon bashing

Go to last post
Canon is a big company and I'm sure they don't need your protection. Canon disappointed a whole BUNCH of current G owners. And now they're hearing about it. Plain and simple.

Some people may very well like the new G7 and may buy it. I'm sure it's a very nice camera. But that doesn't change the fact that Canon disappointed a whole BUNCH of current G owners.

It's not bashing because to many people, the complaints are completely legitimate.

And before some of you make further idiotic statements about the skills of some of the complainers, I suggest you take a look at your own galleries for improvement instead.

If you like the new G7 and don't care about the missing features, that's great. But Canon disappointed a whole BUNCH of current G owners who aren't happy about the G7. Did I mention that Canon disappointed a whole BUNCH of current G owners?

--
Eric
http://full-catastrophe.blogspot.com/
http://www.pbase.com/haglunde
 
do you think i'm wrong...with my 5% number?
Jan Morales said:
kellert said:
said it before and i'll say it again: give me something objective
and substantial that proves my numbers to be completely
wrong...that maybe 5% of powershot users actually use RAW.
Click to expand...
Your arrogance appears to prevent you from giving us "something
objective and substantial that proves" your numbers to be
completely right, even while you ask that we prove you wrong.

And since you just know the "truth", and are here to give it do us,
tell us how many PowerShot users actually use full manual exposure
mode? Don't worry, I promise not to offend you by asking you to
actually support your claims with anything "objective and
substantial".
Click to expand...
 
kellert said:
do you think i'm wrong...with my 5% number?
Click to expand...
Pathetic. You appear to have no grasp whatsoever on logic and reason.

First, you make an assertion you ask us to disprove, while refusing yourself to prove it. This contradiction appears to completely elude you.

Then, assuming that the point of your assertion is that since RAW is used by few PowerShot users (setting aside whether that's true or not) it should bother no one that it's missing, I ask you how many users use another feature: full manual exposure. By your "logic", since it was included in the G7 it must be used by some large percentage of users. Your response? The broken record.

I think it's you who should give it a rest and just go out and take some pictures. Reasoned discussion is demonstrably not your strong suit.
 
hey, jan old girl, you sure seem angry.

i'll try and make it really simple for you. this 5% # is my opinion and i base it as an "educated guess" against my own experience of talking with other photographers using the powershot line. sort of like representative sample testing.

you seem hell bent on letting me know how unfounded my opinion/guess is, but you can't produce anything at all to support your own contention. i don't even know what your contention is...other than you need RAW.

you can't even offer me an opinion on my 5% number.

i just don't see why you're so angry. why don't you just go take some pictures?
Jan Morales said:
kellert said:
do you think i'm wrong...with my 5% number?
Click to expand...
Pathetic. You appear to have no grasp whatsoever on logic and reason.

First, you make an assertion you ask us to disprove, while refusing
yourself to prove it. This contradiction appears to completely
elude you.

Then, assuming that the point of your assertion is that since RAW
is used by few PowerShot users (setting aside whether that's true
or not) it should bother no one that it's missing, I ask you how
many users use another feature: full manual exposure. By your
"logic", since it was included in the G7 it must be used by some
large percentage of users. Your response? The broken record.

I think it's you who should give it a rest and just go out and take
some pictures. Reasoned discussion is demonstrably not your strong
suit.
Click to expand...
 
Wow, I just got back from taking some pictures and you are STILL here!
kellert said:
kellert wrote:

i have a feeling that most bashers are "sucky" photographers that spend most of their time measurebating and reviewing specs.
Click to expand...
 
I think you forgot to mention that Canon disappointed a whole BUNCH of current G owners, and it was a whole BUNCH of current G owners that Canon disappointed.

--

The problem with being at the cutting edge is that you tend to get sliced from time to time.
 
It has a 143hp V6 and a top speed of 76 mph. Don't you think that would leave Corvette owners and potential buyers scratching their heads in disbelief. It would also mean very few 2007 Corvette sales I would think. Except for kellert, who would say "What do you need a V8 for. They just use more gas!"
Alcantara said:
I am a little bit flabergasted; it looks like this forum is
converting into a "kick Canon as much as you can" site.
I have been reading almost daily messages from people who repeat
time and again the same, like p.e. "I am disgusted with the G-7",
"I hate this new camera" etc. etc.
I frankly am not interested to read that a certain person tells us
that he/she will not buy the G-7.
I cannot believe that Canon would be so terribly stupid to market a
new camera with all the "imperfectos" people say it has.
Why don´t we wait until reviews are being published of the
630/640/A-700 IS and the G-7.
If these reviews turn out to be very negative, then we may start
bashing CanonRegards,
J.Alcántara
Click to expand...
 
it looks great on paper.

i understand that panasonic has some nice toys with RAW.
SuperSport said:
Alcantara said:
I am a little bit flabergasted; it looks like this forum is
converting into a "kick Canon as much as you can" site.
I have been reading almost daily messages from people who repeat
time and again the same, like p.e. "I am disgusted with the G-7",
"I hate this new camera" etc. etc.
I frankly am not interested to read that a certain person tells us
that he/she will not buy the G-7.
I cannot believe that Canon would be so terribly stupid to market a
new camera with all the "imperfectos" people say it has.
Why don´t we wait until reviews are being published of the
630/640/A-700 IS and the G-7.
If these reviews turn out to be very negative, then we may start
bashing CanonRegards,
J.Alcántara
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Too many negative thinkers around. And if one likes their old equipment so much, (fine), then what did they want?? a new version of exactly the same cam they had the last 2 yrs? What's the point? Priorities do change.
--
Life is about choices...See Cuba & NEW YORK CITY here:
http://www.jonrp.smugmug.com
 
...and those who blame their camera (for not having RAW files) for their own sucky photos.
kellert said:
Alcantara said:
I am a little bit flabergasted; it looks like this forum is
converting into a "kick Canon as much as you can" site.
I have been reading almost daily messages from people who repeat
time and again the same, like p.e. "I am disgusted with the G-7",
"I hate this new camera" etc. etc.
I frankly am not interested to read that a certain person tells us
that he/she will not buy the G-7.
I cannot believe that Canon would be so terribly stupid to market a
new camera with all the "imperfectos" people say it has.
Why don´t we wait until reviews are being published of the
630/640/A-700 IS and the G-7.
If these reviews turn out to be very negative, then we may start
bashing CanonRegards,
J.Alcántara
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
You should have been around when the G6 came out. Luckily I bought mine before it all started (held it and took test shots as it was being put on the shelf). It was a toy. A piece of junk. It had to have worse noise...how dare they sully the good name of the G. How dare they ignore "me". Sound familiar? You'd have thought you were on the Nikon forum (they are only that way about Canon--if Nikon does it its okay).

Well I've got 18,000 snaps in two years and most of folks on this forum now agree with me that it is a wonderful camera...slow, but wonderful.

The people on this forum (and the 400d/xti/350d forum) are becoming increasingly shrill and insane. There are still some who are interesting in photography and willing to help those who could use a helping hand--I thank them and hope they don't get totally drowned out.

my .02 USD

peter
--
'Paint as you like and die happy. '
--Henry Miller
 
Alcantara said:
I am a little bit flabergasted; it looks like this forum is
converting into a "kick Canon as much as you can" site.
I have been reading almost daily messages from people who repeat
time and again the same, like p.e. "I am disgusted with the G-7",
"I hate this new camera" etc. etc.
I frankly am not interested to read that a certain person tells us
that he/she will not buy the G-7.
Click to expand...
Funnily enough, I myself am a little bit surprised at the amount of people apparently fed up with Canon G7 opinion threads, who then go ahead and open yet another thread about the issue.

The difference is, I'm perfectly OK with opinions contrary to mine; what's more, at this point I almost welcome new threads, regardless of whether they're anti-G7 or anti-antiG7, because it gives the issue a chance to keep going well past what even I thought it would last :-)
Alcantara said:
Why don´t we wait until reviews are being published of the
630/640/A-700 IS and the G-7.
Click to expand...
Either you dislike anti-G7 threads to the point of not having actually read any or them, or you believe that the G7 pending review is somehow making RAW format, swivel LCD and fast lens be features of the G7 that virtually nobody here knew it had.

--
Canon headquarters, circa March 2007:

'Say, do users really need RAW in the EOS450D and 40D? Why not leave it only in the 6D and 1Ds Mark IV?'
 
As I'm willing to bet you will discover over the next 2 years, but not in the way you expect.

--len
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top