Phil's c-/d-50 review and pro canon-ism

[DenisKlim]

I dont know if its me, but i am very put off by Phil's reecent review of c/d 50. In his conclusion section he fails to mention the fact that its THE smallest 5MP digicam to date with almost a pro- set of features. He fails to mention the usability of the included remote and the fact that the cam beats Nikon 5k in resoluton too (the 5k used to be considered as a landmark!).

Its becoming VERY obvious that he is predetermined to "play down" OLY when it comes to an obvious competition with CANON. In fact, he does not mention Canons s 45 and s50 at all, just because they all fail and would not stand a chance to compete with OLY d-50 by all counts (including battery life!). In fact when he talks about battery life, he places canon s45 in his review into PRO-SLR type of cameras for comparison (although there is NOTHING that puts that cam into PRO SLR category) and he puts C- D-50 in to ultra subcompact. Its obvious Canon intended the clumsy s-40/45/50 line as an ultra subcompact too, but they got shot down by OLYs d-40 and now D-50 that are far superior by weight, size, and all their specs.

Since many buying decsions will be based on his review, its a shame Phils is becoming so obvious in the way he frames his reviews. His obvious PRO-canon orientation is EXTREMELY clear and should be taken into consideration.
Regards

 

[Rob S]

Denis K wrote:
. Its obvious Canon intended the clumsy s-40/45/50 line

as an ultra subcompact too, but they got shot down by OLYs d-40

True.

and now D-50 that are far superior by weight, size, and all their specs.

weight and size but ceratainly not spec in the C50 case!

Since many buying decsions will be based on his review, its a shame
Phils is becoming so obvious in the way he frames his reviews. His
obvious PRO-canon orientation is EXTREMELY clear and should be
taken into consideration.

Its not so much the review itself, but the wait for the review. The C50, C5050 and particularly the C4040 had been out for ages before a review appeared!!

 

[Russell Butterfield]

I dont know if its me, but i am very put off by Phil's reecent
review of c/d 50. In his conclusion section he fails to mention
the fact that its THE smallest 5MP digicam to date with almost a
pro- set of features. He fails to mention the usability of the
included remote and the fact that the cam beats Nikon 5k in
resoluton too (the 5k used to be considered as a landmark!).

Its becoming VERY obvious that he is predetermined to "play down"
OLY when it comes to an obvious competition with CANON. In fact, he
does not mention Canons s 45 and s50 at all, just because they all
fail and would not stand a chance to compete with OLY d-50 by all
counts (including battery life!). In fact when he talks about
battery life, he places canon s45 in his review into PRO-SLR type
of cameras for comparison (although there is NOTHING that puts that
cam into PRO SLR category) and he puts C- D-50 in to ultra
subcompact. Its obvious Canon intended the clumsy s-40/45/50 line
as an ultra subcompact too, but they got shot down by OLYs d-40 and
now D-50 that are far superior by weight, size, and all their specs.

Since many buying decsions will be based on his review, its a shame
Phils is becoming so obvious in the way he frames his reviews. His
obvious PRO-canon orientation is EXTREMELY clear and should be
taken into consideration.
Regards

I personally think Phil has had a few problems with Olympus in the past,he maybe anti-Olympus its the feeling we are all getting and have been for some time,maybe there are some things that Olympus have done to really P* S Phil right off,I know I'm pretty fed up with Olympus not letting you update your firmware like other companies do.Maybe Phil is pretty P D off with people keep going on and on about it,I know Phil wont comment..............will you Phil?

Russell Butterfield

http://www.digi-darkroom.com

 

[jrg]

I agree with both Dennis and Russell. On both points. I thought at first it was just me but others have spotted Phil's anti-Oly slant and it's actually getting annoying and tarnishing the credibility of his reviews. On the other hand, Oly's got some really lame people in its marketing department. Oly alienated Wolf Camera so that they removed all Oly products from their line, and the major retailer here in Norway avoids them, too. All these things justify phil's bad attitude toward them, but not their technology which in many cases smokes the competition.

I dont know if its me, but i am very put off by Phil's reecent
review of c/d 50. In his conclusion section he fails to mention
the fact that its THE smallest 5MP digicam to date with almost a
pro- set of features. He fails to mention the usability of the
included remote and the fact that the cam beats Nikon 5k in
resoluton too (the 5k used to be considered as a landmark!).

Its becoming VERY obvious that he is predetermined to "play down"
OLY when it comes to an obvious competition with CANON. In fact, he
does not mention Canons s 45 and s50 at all, just because they all
fail and would not stand a chance to compete with OLY d-50 by all
counts (including battery life!). In fact when he talks about
battery life, he places canon s45 in his review into PRO-SLR type
of cameras for comparison (although there is NOTHING that puts that
cam into PRO SLR category) and he puts C- D-50 in to ultra
subcompact. Its obvious Canon intended the clumsy s-40/45/50 line
as an ultra subcompact too, but they got shot down by OLYs d-40 and
now D-50 that are far superior by weight, size, and all their specs.

Since many buying decsions will be based on his review, its a shame
Phils is becoming so obvious in the way he frames his reviews. His
obvious PRO-canon orientation is EXTREMELY clear and should be
taken into consideration.
Regards

I personally think Phil has had a few problems with Olympus in the
past,he maybe anti-Olympus its the feeling we are all getting and
have been for some time,maybe there are some things that Olympus
have done to really P* S Phil right off,I know I'm pretty fed up
with Olympus not letting you update your firmware like other
companies do.Maybe Phil is pretty P D off with people keep going
on and on about it,I know Phil wont comment..............will you
Phil?

Russell Butterfield

http://www.digi-darkroom.com

 

[Philly]

Well, let me pile on!

I suspect we'll get more fuel on the fire once Phil's Canon S400 review is released. (He had the S400's battery performance listed in the battery performance table in the C-50z review, so I am guessing that he has a S400 under review right now.)

The S400 and C-50z are selling for roughly the same price ($450 for S400 and $435 for C-50z at buydig; and comparable prices elsewhere if you shop around). Phil said he couldn't recommend the C-50z because of the value for the money and the features of the camera. It'll be very interesting to see if he recommends the S400 even though the S400 has almost the same price as the C-50z and less features than the C-50z (no shutter priority, no aperture priority, no manual exposure, no User Mode, no wireless remote, only 4MP vs. 5MP). I just have a feeling that Phil will find something in the S400 that will make it a "recommended" or "highly recommended" product. We'll see.

I dont know if its me, but i am very put off by Phil's reecent
review of c/d 50. In his conclusion section he fails to mention
the fact that its THE smallest 5MP digicam to date with almost a
pro- set of features. He fails to mention the usability of the
included remote and the fact that the cam beats Nikon 5k in
resoluton too (the 5k used to be considered as a landmark!).

Its becoming VERY obvious that he is predetermined to "play down"
OLY when it comes to an obvious competition with CANON. In fact, he
does not mention Canons s 45 and s50 at all, just because they all
fail and would not stand a chance to compete with OLY d-50 by all
counts (including battery life!). In fact when he talks about
battery life, he places canon s45 in his review into PRO-SLR type
of cameras for comparison (although there is NOTHING that puts that
cam into PRO SLR category) and he puts C- D-50 in to ultra
subcompact. Its obvious Canon intended the clumsy s-40/45/50 line
as an ultra subcompact too, but they got shot down by OLYs d-40 and
now D-50 that are far superior by weight, size, and all their specs.

Since many buying decsions will be based on his review, its a shame
Phils is becoming so obvious in the way he frames his reviews. His
obvious PRO-canon orientation is EXTREMELY clear and should be
taken into consideration.
Regards

I personally think Phil has had a few problems with Olympus in the
past,he maybe anti-Olympus its the feeling we are all getting and
have been for some time,maybe there are some things that Olympus
have done to really P* S Phil right off,I know I'm pretty fed up
with Olympus not letting you update your firmware like other
companies do.Maybe Phil is pretty P D off with people keep going
on and on about it,I know Phil wont comment..............will you
Phil?

Russell Butterfield

http://www.digi-darkroom.com

--

 

[Philly]

I suspect we'll get more fuel on the fire once Phil's Canon S400
review is released. (He had the S400's battery performance listed
in the battery performance table in the C-50z review, so I am
guessing that he has a S400 under review right now.)

The S400 and C-50z are selling for roughly the same price ($450 for
S400 and $435 for C-50z at buydig; and comparable prices elsewhere
if you shop around). Phil said he couldn't recommend the C-50z
because of the value for the money and the features of the camera.
It'll be very interesting to see if he recommends the S400 even
though the S400 has almost the same price as the C-50z and less
features than the C-50z (no shutter priority, no aperture priority,
no manual exposure, no User Mode, no wireless remote, only 4MP vs.
5MP). I just have a feeling that Phil will find something in the
S400 that will make it a "recommended" or "highly recommended"
product. We'll see.

I dont know if its me, but i am very put off by Phil's reecent
review of c/d 50. In his conclusion section he fails to mention
the fact that its THE smallest 5MP digicam to date with almost a
pro- set of features. He fails to mention the usability of the
included remote and the fact that the cam beats Nikon 5k in
resoluton too (the 5k used to be considered as a landmark!).

Its becoming VERY obvious that he is predetermined to "play down"
OLY when it comes to an obvious competition with CANON. In fact, he
does not mention Canons s 45 and s50 at all, just because they all
fail and would not stand a chance to compete with OLY d-50 by all
counts (including battery life!). In fact when he talks about
battery life, he places canon s45 in his review into PRO-SLR type
of cameras for comparison (although there is NOTHING that puts that
cam into PRO SLR category) and he puts C- D-50 in to ultra
subcompact. Its obvious Canon intended the clumsy s-40/45/50 line
as an ultra subcompact too, but they got shot down by OLYs d-40 and
now D-50 that are far superior by weight, size, and all their specs.

Since many buying decsions will be based on his review, its a shame
Phils is becoming so obvious in the way he frames his reviews. His
obvious PRO-canon orientation is EXTREMELY clear and should be
taken into consideration.
Regards

I personally think Phil has had a few problems with Olympus in the
past,he maybe anti-Olympus its the feeling we are all getting and
have been for some time,maybe there are some things that Olympus
have done to really P* S Phil right off,I know I'm pretty fed up
with Olympus not letting you update your firmware like other
companies do.Maybe Phil is pretty P D off with people keep going
on and on about it,I know Phil wont comment..............will you
Phil?

Russell Butterfield

http://www.digi-darkroom.com

--

 

[DenisKlim]

You were right on the money indeed the new canon s400 gets a "highly recommended" from Phill, althoughg its a worse choice by all parameters and yet pricier than OLY c-50!

In fact, i like the OLY c-40 better than Canon s400; out of many advantages of OLY c-40 (aa batteries, more flexible feature set, etc etc) the Pixel Mapping feature that most digicam owners will inevitably need one or two years down the road puts any of the olies ahead of the competition!

we rest our case now

Well, let me pile on!

I suspect we'll get more fuel on the fire once Phil's Canon S400
review is released. (He had the S400's battery performance listed
in the battery performance table in the C-50z review, so I am
guessing that he has a S400 under review right now.)

The S400 and C-50z are selling for roughly the same price ($450 for
S400 and $435 for C-50z at buydig; and comparable prices elsewhere
if you shop around). Phil said he couldn't recommend the C-50z
because of the value for the money and the features of the camera.
It'll be very interesting to see if he recommends the S400 even
though the S400 has almost the same price as the C-50z and less
features than the C-50z (no shutter priority, no aperture priority,
no manual exposure, no User Mode, no wireless remote, only 4MP vs.
5MP). I just have a feeling that Phil will find something in the
S400 that will make it a "recommended" or "highly recommended"
product. We'll see.

 

[DenisKlim]

btw, the best isntrument for a really honest camera review is a camera comparometer, found at http://www.imaging-resource.com , which is a far more honest and interesting review site. At least that guy is not openly helping any company (Canon in Phil's case) to push their stock out of the shelves.

take a look at how the new canon s400 really stacks up agains both olies: d-40 and d-50. enuf said, i rest my case.

In fact, i like the OLY c-40 better than Canon s400; out of many
advantages of OLY c-40 (aa batteries, more flexible feature set,
etc etc) the Pixel Mapping feature that most digicam owners will
inevitably need one or two years down the road puts any of the
olies ahead of the competition!

we rest our case now

Well, let me pile on!

I suspect we'll get more fuel on the fire once Phil's Canon S400
review is released. (He had the S400's battery performance listed
in the battery performance table in the C-50z review, so I am
guessing that he has a S400 under review right now.)

The S400 and C-50z are selling for roughly the same price ($450 for
S400 and $435 for C-50z at buydig; and comparable prices elsewhere
if you shop around). Phil said he couldn't recommend the C-50z
because of the value for the money and the features of the camera.
It'll be very interesting to see if he recommends the S400 even
though the S400 has almost the same price as the C-50z and less
features than the C-50z (no shutter priority, no aperture priority,
no manual exposure, no User Mode, no wireless remote, only 4MP vs.
5MP). I just have a feeling that Phil will find something in the
S400 that will make it a "recommended" or "highly recommended"
product. We'll see.

 

[Philly]

This is so blatant that it is even funny. Phil knocks the "value" of the c-50z, citing that it is "probably $100 to expensive for its feature set and quality". He does this even though the only mention of the "price" of the c-50z is the list price, established at the camera's release six months ago.

Meanwhile, Phil goes out of his way in the Canon S400 review to point out that the value of the Canon will be better if its price drops $50, "as it may well be in six months time"!

Just unbelievable! At least, it seems like that Olympus cameras sell pretty well, despite Phil's reviews (and sometimes, lack of reviews).

In fact, i like the OLY c-40 better than Canon s400; out of many
advantages of OLY c-40 (aa batteries, more flexible feature set,
etc etc) the Pixel Mapping feature that most digicam owners will
inevitably need one or two years down the road puts any of the
olies ahead of the competition!

we rest our case now

Well, let me pile on!

I suspect we'll get more fuel on the fire once Phil's Canon S400
review is released. (He had the S400's battery performance listed
in the battery performance table in the C-50z review, so I am
guessing that he has a S400 under review right now.)

The S400 and C-50z are selling for roughly the same price ($450 for
S400 and $435 for C-50z at buydig; and comparable prices elsewhere
if you shop around). Phil said he couldn't recommend the C-50z
because of the value for the money and the features of the camera.
It'll be very interesting to see if he recommends the S400 even
though the S400 has almost the same price as the C-50z and less
features than the C-50z (no shutter priority, no aperture priority,
no manual exposure, no User Mode, no wireless remote, only 4MP vs.
5MP). I just have a feeling that Phil will find something in the
S400 that will make it a "recommended" or "highly recommended"
product. We'll see.

 

[jrg]

Philly,

How right you are! And you really worded it well. What will be interesting is to see how Phil justifies it.

This is really a bad turn in my attitude toward his credibility as a reviewer. He seems to impress everyone by his analyzing fasvtors down to enth the degree, and in instances where, in the end, in print quality, none of these things matter. But an issue like wild and blown out white balance on the Sonys, he just turns a blind eye.

At least now he's more or less out in the open for us to pick at.

The C-50 is selling very well here in Europe. It is receiving very good reviews. So good are the reviews that they make his own inconsistent if you really measure it up against the ratio of reviews that he and others have done about other cameras before.

Meanwhile, Phil goes out of his way in the Canon S400 review to
point out that the value of the Canon will be better if its price
drops $50, "as it may well be in six months time"!

Just unbelievable! At least, it seems like that Olympus cameras
sell pretty well, despite Phil's reviews (and sometimes, lack of
reviews).

In fact, i like the OLY c-40 better than Canon s400; out of many
advantages of OLY c-40 (aa batteries, more flexible feature set,
etc etc) the Pixel Mapping feature that most digicam owners will
inevitably need one or two years down the road puts any of the
olies ahead of the competition!

we rest our case now

Well, let me pile on!

I suspect we'll get more fuel on the fire once Phil's Canon S400
review is released. (He had the S400's battery performance listed
in the battery performance table in the C-50z review, so I am
guessing that he has a S400 under review right now.)

The S400 and C-50z are selling for roughly the same price ($450 for
S400 and $435 for C-50z at buydig; and comparable prices elsewhere
if you shop around). Phil said he couldn't recommend the C-50z
because of the value for the money and the features of the camera.
It'll be very interesting to see if he recommends the S400 even
though the S400 has almost the same price as the C-50z and less
features than the C-50z (no shutter priority, no aperture priority,
no manual exposure, no User Mode, no wireless remote, only 4MP vs.
5MP). I just have a feeling that Phil will find something in the
S400 that will make it a "recommended" or "highly recommended"
product. We'll see.

 

[Russell Butterfield]

How right you are! And you really worded it well. What will be
interesting is to see how Phil justifies it.

This is really a bad turn in my attitude toward his credibility as
a reviewer. He seems to impress everyone by his analyzing fasvtors
down to enth the degree, and in instances where, in the end, in
print quality, none of these things matter. But an issue like wild
and blown out white balance on the Sonys, he just turns a blind eye.

At least now he's more or less out in the open for us to pick at.

The C-50 is selling very well here in Europe. It is receiving very
good reviews. So good are the reviews that they make his own
inconsistent if you really measure it up against the ratio of
reviews that he and others have done about other cameras before.

Meanwhile, Phil goes out of his way in the Canon S400 review to
point out that the value of the Canon will be better if its price
drops $50, "as it may well be in six months time"!

Just unbelievable! At least, it seems like that Olympus cameras
sell pretty well, despite Phil's reviews (and sometimes, lack of
reviews).

In fact, i like the OLY c-40 better than Canon s400; out of many
advantages of OLY c-40 (aa batteries, more flexible feature set,
etc etc) the Pixel Mapping feature that most digicam owners will
inevitably need one or two years down the road puts any of the
olies ahead of the competition!

we rest our case now

Well, let me pile on!

I suspect we'll get more fuel on the fire once Phil's Canon S400
review is released. (He had the S400's battery performance listed
in the battery performance table in the C-50z review, so I am
guessing that he has a S400 under review right now.)

The S400 and C-50z are selling for roughly the same price ($450 for
S400 and $435 for C-50z at buydig; and comparable prices elsewhere
if you shop around). Phil said he couldn't recommend the C-50z
because of the value for the money and the features of the camera.
It'll be very interesting to see if he recommends the S400 even
though the S400 has almost the same price as the C-50z and less
features than the C-50z (no shutter priority, no aperture priority,
no manual exposure, no User Mode, no wireless remote, only 4MP vs.
5MP). I just have a feeling that Phil will find something in the
S400 that will make it a "recommended" or "highly recommended"
product. We'll see.

--

I would be interested in hearing Phil Askeys comments about that,but as he is not an Olympus fan,I doubt we will,will we PHIL?.............

Russell

 

[Agent]

The S230 got the same recommendation and the S400 is the update to the S230. Canon had to really screw up to get the S400 anything less than recommened. And, they didn't as the improved in almost everything from the S230.

The S400 is indeed a better choice than the C-50, I'm sure according to most people. It's smaller than the C-50, uses CF, and the most important thing - it has better image quality.

And one needs not make this seem like it is only a "Phil" thing. Just look at the posts on the forum, all forums, not just the Canon or Oly form. The S400 is clearly the more popular and more wanted camera and you see various posts about it and and you see various comparison posts about the S400 and other cameras.

Meanwhile, Phil goes out of his way in the Canon S400 review to
point out that the value of the Canon will be better if its price
drops $50, "as it may well be in six months time"!

Just unbelievable! At least, it seems like that Olympus cameras
sell pretty well, despite Phil's reviews (and sometimes, lack of
reviews).

In fact, i like the OLY c-40 better than Canon s400; out of many
advantages of OLY c-40 (aa batteries, more flexible feature set,
etc etc) the Pixel Mapping feature that most digicam owners will
inevitably need one or two years down the road puts any of the
olies ahead of the competition!

we rest our case now

Well, let me pile on!

I suspect we'll get more fuel on the fire once Phil's Canon S400
review is released. (He had the S400's battery performance listed
in the battery performance table in the C-50z review, so I am
guessing that he has a S400 under review right now.)

The S400 and C-50z are selling for roughly the same price ($450 for
S400 and $435 for C-50z at buydig; and comparable prices elsewhere
if you shop around). Phil said he couldn't recommend the C-50z
because of the value for the money and the features of the camera.
It'll be very interesting to see if he recommends the S400 even
though the S400 has almost the same price as the C-50z and less
features than the C-50z (no shutter priority, no aperture priority,
no manual exposure, no User Mode, no wireless remote, only 4MP vs.
5MP). I just have a feeling that Phil will find something in the
S400 that will make it a "recommended" or "highly recommended"
product. We'll see.

--
http://www/pbase.com/agent2099

 

[Philly]

Phil never reviewed the S230. But please don't let that interfer with your insightful analysis.

The S400 is indeed a better choice than the C-50, I'm sure
according to most people. It's smaller than the C-50, uses CF, and
the most important thing - it has better image quality.

And one needs not make this seem like it is only a "Phil" thing.
Just look at the posts on the forum, all forums, not just the Canon
or Oly form. The S400 is clearly the more popular and more wanted
camera and you see various posts about it and and you see various
comparison posts about the S400 and other cameras.

Meanwhile, Phil goes out of his way in the Canon S400 review to
point out that the value of the Canon will be better if its price
drops $50, "as it may well be in six months time"!

Just unbelievable! At least, it seems like that Olympus cameras
sell pretty well, despite Phil's reviews (and sometimes, lack of
reviews).

In fact, i like the OLY c-40 better than Canon s400; out of many
advantages of OLY c-40 (aa batteries, more flexible feature set,
etc etc) the Pixel Mapping feature that most digicam owners will
inevitably need one or two years down the road puts any of the
olies ahead of the competition!

we rest our case now

Well, let me pile on!

I suspect we'll get more fuel on the fire once Phil's Canon S400
review is released. (He had the S400's battery performance listed
in the battery performance table in the C-50z review, so I am
guessing that he has a S400 under review right now.)

The S400 and C-50z are selling for roughly the same price ($450 for
S400 and $435 for C-50z at buydig; and comparable prices elsewhere
if you shop around). Phil said he couldn't recommend the C-50z
because of the value for the money and the features of the camera.
It'll be very interesting to see if he recommends the S400 even
though the S400 has almost the same price as the C-50z and less
features than the C-50z (no shutter priority, no aperture priority,
no manual exposure, no User Mode, no wireless remote, only 4MP vs.
5MP). I just have a feeling that Phil will find something in the
S400 that will make it a "recommended" or "highly recommended"
product. We'll see.

--
http://www/pbase.com/agent2099

 

[Gene Miller77510]

I too get a feeling of Phil's anti-Olympus sentiments in all his reviews about Olympus cameras and his bias in favor of Canon cameras. But never-the-less, this is his site and he is the reviewer and has the right to say anything he wants. I myself never trust any one reviewer and will always check out a product myself. I consider user reviews to carry more weight for me when shopping. Olympus cameras have been given fantastic reviews by other reviewers when Phil's review of the same Olympus camera has only been average or above average. His comment on jaggys and CA on Olympus cameras is a joke and shows his bias, but like I said, he has the right to have any bias he wants and we have to right to weigh his review against our own experience and other reviewers and user reviews.

I dont know if its me, but i am very put off by Phil's reecent
review of c/d 50. In his conclusion section he fails to mention
the fact that its THE smallest 5MP digicam to date with almost a
pro- set of features. He fails to mention the usability of the
included remote and the fact that the cam beats Nikon 5k in
resoluton too (the 5k used to be considered as a landmark!).

Its becoming VERY obvious that he is predetermined to "play down"
OLY when it comes to an obvious competition with CANON. In fact, he
does not mention Canons s 45 and s50 at all, just because they all
fail and would not stand a chance to compete with OLY d-50 by all
counts (including battery life!). In fact when he talks about
battery life, he places canon s45 in his review into PRO-SLR type
of cameras for comparison (although there is NOTHING that puts that
cam into PRO SLR category) and he puts C- D-50 in to ultra
subcompact. Its obvious Canon intended the clumsy s-40/45/50 line
as an ultra subcompact too, but they got shot down by OLYs d-40 and
now D-50 that are far superior by weight, size, and all their specs.

Since many buying decsions will be based on his review, its a shame
Phils is becoming so obvious in the way he frames his reviews. His
obvious PRO-canon orientation is EXTREMELY clear and should be
taken into consideration.
Regards

--
C700uz, E100rs, Stylus 300
http://www.pbase.com/gene
Life is just a stage and we all have enough pictures to proof it!

 

[Agent]

Sorry, it was the 330 (has been months since I read the review). Still can be argued that the S400 is an update from it as well.

My point is the same.

The S400 is indeed a better choice than the C-50, I'm sure
according to most people. It's smaller than the C-50, uses CF, and
the most important thing - it has better image quality.

And one needs not make this seem like it is only a "Phil" thing.
Just look at the posts on the forum, all forums, not just the Canon
or Oly form. The S400 is clearly the more popular and more wanted
camera and you see various posts about it and and you see various
comparison posts about the S400 and other cameras.

Meanwhile, Phil goes out of his way in the Canon S400 review to
point out that the value of the Canon will be better if its price
drops $50, "as it may well be in six months time"!

Just unbelievable! At least, it seems like that Olympus cameras
sell pretty well, despite Phil's reviews (and sometimes, lack of
reviews).

In fact, i like the OLY c-40 better than Canon s400; out of many
advantages of OLY c-40 (aa batteries, more flexible feature set,
etc etc) the Pixel Mapping feature that most digicam owners will
inevitably need one or two years down the road puts any of the
olies ahead of the competition!

we rest our case now

Well, let me pile on!

I suspect we'll get more fuel on the fire once Phil's Canon S400
review is released. (He had the S400's battery performance listed
in the battery performance table in the C-50z review, so I am
guessing that he has a S400 under review right now.)

The S400 and C-50z are selling for roughly the same price ($450 for
S400 and $435 for C-50z at buydig; and comparable prices elsewhere
if you shop around). Phil said he couldn't recommend the C-50z
because of the value for the money and the features of the camera.
It'll be very interesting to see if he recommends the S400 even
though the S400 has almost the same price as the C-50z and less
features than the C-50z (no shutter priority, no aperture priority,
no manual exposure, no User Mode, no wireless remote, only 4MP vs.
5MP). I just have a feeling that Phil will find something in the
S400 that will make it a "recommended" or "highly recommended"
product. We'll see.

--
http://www/pbase.com/agent2099

--
http://www/pbase.com/agent2099

 

[Karen Stuebing]

..but it was Phil's review of the 5050 that helped sway me in that direction. He praised the camera in all aspects except noise and CA and if you read reviews of other cameras, they all suffer from that to varying degrees. No lens is perfect. So he may be anti-Olympus but he did a good job of convincing me that the 5050 was the best value for the money.

Karen

I dont know if its me, but i am very put off by Phil's reecent
review of c/d 50. In his conclusion section he fails to mention
the fact that its THE smallest 5MP digicam to date with almost a
pro- set of features. He fails to mention the usability of the
included remote and the fact that the cam beats Nikon 5k in
resoluton too (the 5k used to be considered as a landmark!).

Its becoming VERY obvious that he is predetermined to "play down"
OLY when it comes to an obvious competition with CANON. In fact, he
does not mention Canons s 45 and s50 at all, just because they all
fail and would not stand a chance to compete with OLY d-50 by all
counts (including battery life!). In fact when he talks about
battery life, he places canon s45 in his review into PRO-SLR type
of cameras for comparison (although there is NOTHING that puts that
cam into PRO SLR category) and he puts C- D-50 in to ultra
subcompact. Its obvious Canon intended the clumsy s-40/45/50 line
as an ultra subcompact too, but they got shot down by OLYs d-40 and
now D-50 that are far superior by weight, size, and all their specs.

Since many buying decsions will be based on his review, its a shame
Phils is becoming so obvious in the way he frames his reviews. His
obvious PRO-canon orientation is EXTREMELY clear and should be
taken into consideration.
Regards

--
C700uz, E100rs, Stylus 300
http://www.pbase.com/gene
Life is just a stage and we all have enough pictures to proof it!

 

[Gene Miller77510]

I'm glad he did because you have what I think is a great camera. I think what I am talking about is the conclusions he draws after he gives some interesting facts. If you stick to his facts and not his conclusions, I can understand. Other reviewers were more postitive in their final conclusion.

Karen

I dont know if its me, but i am very put off by Phil's reecent
review of c/d 50. In his conclusion section he fails to mention
the fact that its THE smallest 5MP digicam to date with almost a
pro- set of features. He fails to mention the usability of the
included remote and the fact that the cam beats Nikon 5k in
resoluton too (the 5k used to be considered as a landmark!).

Its becoming VERY obvious that he is predetermined to "play down"
OLY when it comes to an obvious competition with CANON. In fact, he
does not mention Canons s 45 and s50 at all, just because they all
fail and would not stand a chance to compete with OLY d-50 by all
counts (including battery life!). In fact when he talks about
battery life, he places canon s45 in his review into PRO-SLR type
of cameras for comparison (although there is NOTHING that puts that
cam into PRO SLR category) and he puts C- D-50 in to ultra
subcompact. Its obvious Canon intended the clumsy s-40/45/50 line
as an ultra subcompact too, but they got shot down by OLYs d-40 and
now D-50 that are far superior by weight, size, and all their specs.

Since many buying decsions will be based on his review, its a shame
Phils is becoming so obvious in the way he frames his reviews. His
obvious PRO-canon orientation is EXTREMELY clear and should be
taken into consideration.
Regards

--
C700uz, E100rs, Stylus 300
http://www.pbase.com/gene
Life is just a stage and we all have enough pictures to proof it!

--
C700uz, E100rs, Stylus 300
http://www.pbase.com/gene
Life is just a stage and we all have enough pictures to proof it!

 

[Phil Askey]

You may believe what you like but I can assure you these details:

a. No bad blood between me and Olympus (never has been - although Olympus have been slow in the past to get review units to me, that's their loss)

b. No 'brandism' or 'favourtism' for one camera or another, I review a camera based on its merits, on the status of the market at the current time (and knowing a little about what's coming)

c. Lots of factors affect my feeling and overall conclusion for a camera, I list them at the end of the review. Mostly image quality, value for money and having a decent feature set are important.

It's hard to convince owners or people who are brand-loyal when you post a so-so review but I believe in the work I do enough not to be swayed (either way) by it.

I dont know if its me, but i am very put off by Phil's reecent
review of c/d 50. In his conclusion section he fails to mention
the fact that its THE smallest 5MP digicam to date with almost a
pro- set of features. He fails to mention the usability of the
included remote and the fact that the cam beats Nikon 5k in
resoluton too (the 5k used to be considered as a landmark!).

Its becoming VERY obvious that he is predetermined to "play down"
OLY when it comes to an obvious competition with CANON. In fact, he
does not mention Canons s 45 and s50 at all, just because they all
fail and would not stand a chance to compete with OLY d-50 by all
counts (including battery life!). In fact when he talks about
battery life, he places canon s45 in his review into PRO-SLR type
of cameras for comparison (although there is NOTHING that puts that
cam into PRO SLR category) and he puts C- D-50 in to ultra
subcompact. Its obvious Canon intended the clumsy s-40/45/50 line
as an ultra subcompact too, but they got shot down by OLYs d-40 and
now D-50 that are far superior by weight, size, and all their specs.

Since many buying decsions will be based on his review, its a shame
Phils is becoming so obvious in the way he frames his reviews. His
obvious PRO-canon orientation is EXTREMELY clear and should be
taken into consideration.
Regards

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

 

[HWLee]

He's obviously pro Canon. I own S45. Camera has very bad CA in many shots, focus in low light sucks big time, corner sharpness of the lens is VERY soft, as sharpness in general.

If I read the S-Series reviews, there's almost no mention about those things (although I bought camera before I knew this site) but with the Olys and other manufacturers, Askey often makes a big deal about every jaggie and other peanuts "problem" that you will only see if you blow it up in PS to xxx% anyway.

Also I have to say that a) the Canon people (especially on this board) are the worst nit-pickers I've ever seen and b) especially G3 owners seem to be the most cocky camera owners. If you read some of their posts or answers, you think they speak about a 10000$ piece of equipment.

 

[Marty Schultz]

c. Lots of factors affect my feeling and overall conclusion for a
camera, I list them at the end of the review. Mostly image
quality, value for money and having a decent feature set are
important.

Something I've wondered about, you (and most reviewers) usually use the camera default settings for testing. I've only used maybe 6 different digital cameras but with at least half of them the default settings do not give the best image quality. I know using the default settings is the easiest way (and probably the only fair way) to make comparisons, I'm just wondering if you have noticed which companies do the best job with default settings. From the cameras I've used I can pick up a Kodak or a Canon and use the default settings but with Nikon and Olympus the settings need to be tweaked.

--
Later,
Marty

C-2IOO, D-49O, D-40Z

We’re riding on the escalator of life, we’re shopping in the human mall.