Reading mode: Light Dark

Canon bashing

Go to last post
jonrobertp said:
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.
Click to expand...
Of course we don't want a new version of exactly the same camera. What kind of ridiculous statement is that. We want an updated, faster focusing, image stabilized, cleaner high ISO imaged, tilt and swiveled, RAW shoot-in, hot shooed camera worthy of carrying the G name.
 
kellert is clearly just trolling. Otherwise he'd make his point and leave it at that.

--len
 
OK, I hear you. And no disagreement. Yet, the company thought otherwise. Isn't it rare that a company makes exactly what one wants?
--
Life is about choices...See Cuba & NEW YORK CITY here:
http://www.jonrp.smugmug.com
 
People are not "Bashing Canon", but they are critizing the design choices they made with the G7 as a continuation of the prestigious G-series of digital cameras. As a continuation of the G-series, the G7 is a major disappointment.

As a stand-alone camera the G7 may be a very good camera or even a great camera. It certainly has some new things such as IS, and a new 6x lens. But that's not the issue at hand. The problem people have is that the G7 is not a G-series level camera, but it is named "G7".

A review in this case won't be of any help since a review cannot add RAW, a review cannot add a twist-n-shout LCD, a review cannot add all the things missing from the G7 but are available in the previous G-series...

If you are not interested in reading those messages, there are thousands of messages that do not talk about the G7 :-)

To summarize: People are not saying the G7 is a bad camera, but they are upset because it is not at the same feature level as the previous G-series.
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...
--
Comprehensive Photokina 2006 speculation: http://photographyetc.livejournal.com
 
Do you need a review by some "big shot authority" to tell you the G7 doesn't have raw, doesn't have a flip out screen, doesn't use CF cards or the BP-511, etc? The G series is aimed squarely at serious photogs, not P&S users. These are the specs we look at. This itself is enough to turn people away.
 
SuperSport said:
interbear said:
kellert said:
i have a feeling that most bashers are "sucky" photographers that
spend most of their time measurebating and reviewing specs.
Click to expand...
"measurebating".......what a fantastic term, hit the nail on the head!
Click to expand...
Where have you been for the last 3 years?
Click to expand...
Not anywhere these forums clearly.............apologies for my ignorance on photographic jargon

I'll come back in 3 years and see if there is anything else to learn
 
Many complain because their favorite attribute can't be found in one camera design. Many would like to design the ideal camera...(if only the Pana LX-1 had a viewfinder and less noise.)

For the G7 it might be that Canon felt a 6x zoom (with f:2.8 to keep weight down) was more important than f:2, etc. And IS was more important than the folding LCD.

In any case, the market for this camera may well not be the folks who complain the most, and as you say, the "bottom line" is that the proof will be in the image quality.

Ed
 
Your reply seems to be ad hominem with limited forced choices.

It would appear image quality isn't your primary interest?

Ed
 
It may be Canon Bashing in this forum but if you look at most of the other forums you will find all the latest releases are being bashed just as much, as were almost all releases in the past. I just wonder if all the bashers really know anything about photography or just like to make themselves heard.

I use Raw on my Canon DSLR very very occasionally but in 99.9% of the time I use jpg. Usually the only time I use raw is when I have to under expose by several of stops because there isn't enough light and then using raw I can extract a better picture from it than I can using jpg.

I have quite a few friends with various makes of digital P&S cameras and DSLR's and out of them not one uses RAW and that includes a person who makes his living from wedding photography. If you must have tthe utmost quality from you camera and you really do need to use raw all the time then a camera like the G7 or any of the compacts certainly aren't the cameras for you. A top of the range DSLR would be more likely to fit the bill assuming you can afford to pay many times the price for a body, lenses and accessories.

With a little experience a person can get great shots from any of the digital cameras on the market today and if they can't then in most cases its not the fault of the camera just the operator.

The fact is that if a camera doesn't have all the thing you want from it then simple don't buy it.
 
Ed Bigelow said:
Your reply seems to be ad hominem with limited forced choices.

It would appear image quality isn't your primary interest?
Click to expand...
Sorry for the tone in my reply.

I’m sure you read the messages that I linked. The image quality is one of my primary concerns; another is that in what situations I can get the image quality out of the camera. What we have been shown for this 10 mega pixel CCD-chip doesn’t promise much. Furthermore, I understand pretty much the inherent limitations of microelectronics and know what kind of compromise this type of imager is. To a bit surprise, thanks to exceptional optics, the resolution might be there but unfortunately so will be poor native SNR and quite limited DR, a trade-off I would not have cared to see.

-Virvatulet
 
Ed Bigelow said:
Many complain because their favorite attribute can't be found in
one camera design. Many would like to design the ideal camera...(if
only the Pana LX-1 had a viewfinder and less noise.)

For the G7 it might be that Canon felt a 6x zoom (with f:2.8 to
keep weight down) was more important than f:2, etc. And IS was more
important than the folding LCD.

In any case, the market for this camera may well not be the folks
who complain the most, and as you say, the "bottom line" is that
the proof will be in the image quality.

Ed
Click to expand...
Thinking about what you wrote and you made a very good point..Image quality matters!!!...I personally would have liked the features from previous G-models to have remained but thats just me being a bit fussy about buying my first camera...I don'thave the knowledge many of you have. Until i get a camera in my hands i won't really know....Hopefully, and this is just a personal view, the G7 might address some of the low light issues i've read about other G-models had in the past.
 
kellert said:
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.
Click to expand...
This is funny. Do you really belive that the people you talked to qualify as a representative sample of anything?
 
Hehe, that's kind of fun (since it must have been a joke...) Why can't people accept that some like to fiddle with RAW images and others feel that JPEG are good enough? It must have been the same before when some developed their own photos while others liked the picture taking part, or maybe not?

I'm tired of all Canon bashing. Isn't it time to agree that we do not agree? We are spamming this forum with useles arguments... I have my opinion but since I no longer want to read others arguments in about whether RAW is necessary or not, I will not share mine here...

Canon made some design choices, and I can guarantee that they made them after carefully analysing the market and these are the cameras that they believe will earn them most money at an acceptable risk. Now go and answer my serious questions instead of bashing each other ;)
 
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