Did the Canon "Impossible" Hoax drain the life out this forum?

[DugT]

Or is it just me?

I had a lot of respect for Canon but that advertising fiasco was deflating.

 

[PhotoKhan]

There are some points that have to be made here, on account of people who might just read what I wrote for this particular fiasco.

There you go again.

I can't understand why it is perceived that this is such a huge fiasco.

I used the word "fiasco" unadvisedly and almost by instinct probably induced by previous reading.

I tend to write in a "stream of consciousness" that usually needs revision before or right after publishing.

Except for the technical blunder related to the elapsing clock, "fiasco" is not an appropriate word, in this situation.

I edited the post to read "for this particular campaign case", instead of "for this particular fiasco"

The system accepted it. I checked it by direct linking to my reply again.

I now find it uncorrected it this reply of yours.

I find this disturbing.

I love my Canon gear. Only a good friend of mine at Canon Portugal is fully aware of how much how love it, on account of our continuous in-depth talks.

I am currently through two days off from work and just yesterday, apart from the interesting repartee here, on DPR, I spent an afternoon with a stupid contentment smile in my face, processing over 50 photos from a recent trip of Japan, each one of them with a quality that only underlined, in my view, the futility of the endless exchanges that go around here, regarding putative Canon's limitations.

I am also the one that actually tackles "activists" like Mikael Risedal in their rampant crusade about sub-performing Canon sensors. It has been my continuous stance here that I don't actually see those shortcomings as detrimental for great, great photography, as proven by amazing photographers from any type of photography.

...But the current "lag behind" does exist.

Canon use their own sensor technology and continue to improve their 0.5um line and it remains largely competitive. Nikon use something someone else came up with. If that means Canon are lagging in innovation, then you may be right.

But, as Chipworks say, "It is a credit to Canon that it has remained competitive by continuing to optimize its pixels fabricated in a relatively mature process".

And given this from Chipworks ...

"Canon does have a 0.18 µm generation CIS wafer fab process, featuring a specialized Cu back end of line (BEOL) including light pipes (shown below)."

... it would seem that they have plenty of innovation capability within them. Perhaps all they are learning by the continued improvement to their 0.5um line will just make the next generation even better. Who knows?

But I'm thinking they have a better idea than most here. ;-)

Although in its own and as explained it is not a problem, it turns the current claims of "Vision" and tackling "Impossible" extremely pompous, awkwardly displaced and almost surrealist.

That's one way to look at it I guess. Particularly if one had wound oneself up on the hope that it would be an announcement of a new high DR high rez body.

But it wasn't. It was about something else entirely. It was about creativity - a word that is like poison on this forum it seems. And inspiration and motivation.

If one thinks that an advertising campaign that encourages these things is "extremely pompous, awkwardly displaced and almost surrealist" simply because the company running the campaign does not have an EXMOR based high resolution body, then one is entitled to think that and say so.

But don't expect me to agree.

Had such campaign been launched during the years when Canon was the only brand offering full-frame or, more recently, when they brilliantly first incorporated video into the 5D, it would have been just a bloated self-serving campaign (as any single one mostly is) but it would have made sense. In a few years, who knows, it may also make sense.

But, at the moment and as I predicted here , it only serves a users-alienating purpose by blatantly call everyone's attention to how they currently are pretty much the opposite of that.

Once again - where are all the Nikon innovations? You say in your 'prediction' that Canon are "sub-revolutionary", so what revolutionary things have Nikon brought to the table lately? (apart from using someone elses innovation?)

I am finding myself in the strange position of being challenged for what I actually also believe:

That whatever shortcomings Canon may currently suffer from, they certainly do not preclude satisfactory, good or excellent photography, of any kind, to been performed and enjoyed.

As for the shortcomings, you're certainly not dragging me into to the discussion that, precisely, I find most futile.

In a last attempt to clarify my position, I'll try it more schematically:

1. Canon is currently lagging behind competition. This is perceived, discussed and explained to such an extent, even right here on DPR, that denying it is more in the realm of "fanboyism" than honest reasoning.

An excellent example on how this perception is well inculcated can be derived by any intelligent person from the line of questioning used by Barney Britton and Simon Joinson during the last part of the interview with Mr. Maeda at Photokina, as well as from his defensive, subliminally-reveling defensive answers.

I suggest you ask them why they felt those were the appropriate questions to ask.

2. The practical implications of this "lagging behind" can only be revealed by each photographer, for each individual application. Again, they seem to not have much of an impact for the vast majority, myself included.

3. Canon elected to launch an "in-your-face" campaign about how they (...and only they...) see "Impossible", navigating through "Fear", "Doubt" (....ok...), "Logic" and "Reason" (...what?...).

The initial introductory text of the teaser was even more grandiloquent, with clear connotations to "Vision" and "Innovation".

4. A communicational strategy that is bound to underline a (probably) temporary negative trait, is an ill-advised one.

I hope this as schematic enough to avoid misreadings and abusive extrapolations.

Thank you fro the exchange.

Just imagine a brand that had to let go half to one third of their workforce on account of declining sales, coming up with campaign about "We Center on Human".

How would that sound?

Irrelevant?

(This may be a clue as to why we are not on the same page.)

PK

--
“Loose praise may feed my ego but constructive criticism advances my skills”
************************************************************
-------------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/photokhan
(PBase Supporter)
-------------------------------------------------

 

[Schwany]

Canon has other business beside cameras. Considering the ad had nothing to do with photography equipment, I don't get what the concern is about. Have fun worrying about it though.

 

[PhotoKhan]

It's a fiasco only for the gear headed...

Hmmm...maybe I must revisit what I am then...

Maybe, but just maybe...

people are very good at imagining things and raising expectations, but it was clear that this was just an add campaign.

Curious that you didn't make the call it was going to be a non-major-gear related event before the unveil. I did.

Well, in my mind it was really obvious... but people really like to speculate that Canon are finally going to release their new wonder camera of 50 mpixel, and then will complain that it is too expensive...

It turns out that the new microsite features work and images that aim to inspire people to boost their creativity and imagination.

Don't know about you...myself, I don't need a brand site (that is bound to relay brand-produced material only) to inspire me. I do it daily, by checking on know and unknown photographers, their amazing work and their explicit or implicit messages.

I do to, it is just that there are a lot of excellent photographers featured in brand sites, I regularly check, besides Canon, Nikon, Leica, Olympus, Zeiss, and so on. You see, those guys are really good, and when looking at their photos, nobody will pay any attention to the gear they used. Only the gear headed...

I get much more inspired by seeing good images from others, than from waiting on a new camera or lens...

Why wouldn't you?...Even full-fledged, hardcore gearheads never claim that their perpetual wait for "the next big thing" is a vector of inspiration.

Really? That kind of contradicts the hysterical reaction to the "impossible" thing being no more than an add campaign...

People that keep bashing Canon for not being innovative, or lagging behind brand A or B, are just missing the point... honestly, are people really limited on their creativity or imagination when using Canon cameras and lenses? If the answer is "yes", then I think the limitations lie with you, not the gear...

I apologize for my photographic limitations but, while feeling no desire to "bash" anything (...how comfortable to use out-of-the-can Internet neologisms...)

Oh, pardon my French... I will correct that for "blaming". But you know, "bash" is not a out-of-the-can whatever neologism, it actually means: to strike with a crushing blow, and it is mostly used in Canada and the UK. But I digress...

I'm also not the type of consumer drone that can't recognize the irony and sheer surreal-comicality of a brand that has a current week position in what comes to innovation being brazen enough to actually come up with a verbose grand-rhetorical campaign on how their "Vison" (...and only theirs, mind you...) tackles "Impossible", (...with a pseudo-trendy lack of the "The", no less).

Again, this repetition that Canon is in a weak position regarding innovation. Perhaps it is the users that are weak in their photographic quality? Again, I reiterate my initial question: in what way is current Canon equipment limiting your photographic endeavours? Because I fail to see how lots of photographers make wonderful photos and make a living with Canon equipment (many of them actually win awards year after year), whereas people here keep complaining about how Canon are "lagging way behind"?

As well-informed, intelligent and reasoning photographer-consumers, we have two options to deal with a campaign that arrogant-offensively claims: "This message goes out to fear, doubt, logic and reason. We don't see what you see. At Canon, we see Impossible." after 2 years of mostly Powershot-type-of-meh! output.

Arrogant? Offensive? My, are we defensive or what? I suppose you have been a cave in the last two years...

We can either go "Really!?!!?" or "Look at the pretty lights...they are so beautiful..."

I know what I feel and, judging from the inputs of non-gearhead users of DPR whom I most respect both for their photography and their articulate contributions, I am not alone.

PK

--
“Loose praise may feed my ego but constructive criticism advances my skills”
************************************************************
-------------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/photokhan
(PBase Supporter)
-------------------------------------------------

whatever, I am going back to my lowly m43 now...

--
www.paulobizarro.com
http://blog.paulobizarro.com/

There was no "hysterical" reaction. Yours is the only one I would (now) remotely label as such. There were joking (some borderline infantile) reactions but, as we say in Portuguese "eles puseram-se a jeito", so...

("Troll" is also widely been used in English as a verb - both transitive and intransitive- and as a noun. It does not preclude it from also being a Web neologism. The use of words like "troll" or "basher", as epithets to others, on the Internet, corresponds to the lower common denominator of intelligent reasoning, as it functions as the electronic equivalent of schoolyard children putting both hands on their ears, closing their eyes and going "I don't hear you, la, la, la" when they want to have it their way. As such, both terms should be avoided by discerning people. Talking about negative traits of something is not "bashing", it's just...errr...talking about those negative traits.)

I will now go back to my cave (...meaning: Process more amazing output from my Canon gear).

If you're interested, and to finalize this exchange as far as I am concerned, read this reply of mine to Schmegg:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54528355

PK

--
“Loose praise may feed my ego but constructive criticism advances my skills”
************************************************************
-------------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/photokhan
(PBase Supporter)
-------------------------------------------------

 

[Mako2011]

There are some points that have to be made here, on account of people who might just read what I wrote for this particular fiasco.

There you go again.

I can't understand why it is perceived that this is such a huge fiasco.

I used the word "fiasco" unadvisedly and almost by instinct probably induced by previous reading.

I tend to write in a "stream of consciousness" that usually needs revision before or right after publishing.

Except for the technical blunder related to the elapsing clock, "fiasco" is not an appropriate word, in this situation.

I edited the post to read "for this particular campaign case", instead of "for this particular fiasco"

The system accepted it. I checked it by direct linking to my reply again.

I now find it uncorrected it this reply of yours.

I find this disturbing.

I checked. schmehgg began writing his reply prior to your edit of "fiasco". That means his reply will mimic the prior post vs the latter. That's the discrepancy. The system can't correct a post in progress when an edit has occurred while a response is being written. Just how it works.

 

[bgbs]

...that Canoniers are hungry for some BIG news from Canon. So, when they hear some message from Canon that remotely suggests something big is coming, their imagination kicks in. They begin to meditate on the supposed big message, then try to read between the line to decipher it, and eventually overthink the whole thing, leading to all kinds of expectations that never come to fruition.

Canon is probably scratching its head right now thinking "man, we have to be careful what words we use in our marketing, cause our base is going berserk."

 

[johnierebel]

...that Canoniers are hungry for some BIG news from Canon. So, when they hear some message from Canon that remotely suggests something big is coming, their imagination kicks in. They begin to meditate on the supposed big message, then try to read between the line to decipher it, and eventually overthink the whole thing, leading to all kinds of expectations that never come to fruition.

Canon is probably scratching its head right now thinking "man, we have to be careful what words we use in our marketing, cause our base is going berserk."

Your right, I wasn't disappointed because I am already disaffected . The problem is that Canon never says anything about their plans which is why a portion of their base is going berserk. They are holding an empty hand (poker) & don't want to call.

 

[PhotoKhan]

There are some points that have to be made here, on account of people who might just read what I wrote for this particular fiasco.

There you go again.

I can't understand why it is perceived that this is such a huge fiasco.

I used the word "fiasco" unadvisedly and almost by instinct probably induced by previous reading.

I tend to write in a "stream of consciousness" that usually needs revision before or right after publishing.

Except for the technical blunder related to the elapsing clock, "fiasco" is not an appropriate word, in this situation.

I edited the post to read "for this particular campaign case", instead of "for this particular fiasco"

The system accepted it. I checked it by direct linking to my reply again.

I now find it uncorrected it this reply of yours.

I find this disturbing.

I checked. schmehgg began writing his reply prior to your edit of "fiasco". That means his reply will mimic the prior post vs the latter. That's the discrepancy. The system can't correct a post in progress when an edit has occurred while a response is being written. Just how it works.

 

[DugT]

Some here have accused me of being overly optimistic that the "Impossible" ad was about a camera. If you look at my posts from before the end of the countdown you will see I thought it was unlikely the coming announcement would be about a camera. My complaint is about the ad itself which led to hopeful expectations and then disappointment. Considering the scale of the disappointment, I still consider it to be a fiasco.

In her post above titled "Reality Bites", I think Jane79 articulated this beautifully. If you like it, give her a thumbs up. Another reason I include her post her is it was at the bottom of a sub-thread where it might not get the attention I think it deserves.

Jane79 wrote:

What I am doing, and perhaps Paul too, and aftab, and maybe some others, is give a different perspective.

If your marketing campaign gets ~1500 NEGATIVE comments on the largest online plattform for one of the advertised products within 24 hours, and the negative to positive ratings ratio of the commercials on Youtube is 8:1 with 100% of comments being negative, then something has gone terribly wrong with your campaign. You can film an ant sitting on your knee with a camera phone and get better feedback and ratings on Youtube.

This campaign is a major failure on pretty much every level:

1. There is no clear message. Where others see possible, Canon sees impossible? What? Canon does not see what "naysayers" and "it cannot be done!" types see? But those are the very people seeing "impossible"! Confused yet? Are they trying to say that where all the others are seeing "impossible", Canon is actually seeing "possible"? Make up your mind!
   -
2. A countdown counts down to an event. If the event is advertised as being something "impossible", then people watching will expect something at least interesting, some will even expect to see something impressive, like, you know, "impossible". Obviously two very 80's commercials won't cut it, so you're setting everybody up for a disappointment. When the campaign finally gets off the ground, your customers are all disappointed. Not exactly what most brands are aiming for.
   -
3. Insulting the intelligence of your customers is a bad idea. Everybody knows that the one-in-a-million self-published besteseller has absolutely nothing to do with the printer the manuscript or the print-on-demand paperback was printed on. The idea is really really preposterous and does not deserve to be made into a commercial. It's the same with the wornout romantic idea that all you need to do to make your son or daughter into the next Oscar winning Stephen Spielberg is buying him/her a Canon camera. Everybody knows that it's not the camera. Respecting your customers instead of insulting them is a good idea.

So yes, this campaign is ill-conceived, but let's not lose perspective. Canon is a giant in the history of photography and can be proud of its contribution to the craft. Great cameras and lenses carry the Canon name, a name that has earned the respect of both photographers and competitors over the course of more than half a century of innovation in the field of imaging. This poor campaign by some NYC advertising agency is insignificant, it has nothing to do with Canon's past achievements, and it has nothing to do with the Canon engineers right now working on the cameras and lenses that will take great, haunting, unforgettable, sad, beautiful pictures in the future, when this campaign will be long forgotten.

--
Some of my pics are in my DPReview Gallery
dt

 

[ppires85]

Some here have accused me of being overly optimistic that the "Impossible" ad was about a camera. If you look at my posts from before the end of the countdown you will see I thought it was unlikely the coming announcement would be about a camera. My complaint is about the ad itself which led to hopeful expectations and then disappointment. Considering the scale of the disappointment, I still consider it to be a fiasco.

In her post above titled "Reality Bites", I think Jane79 articulated this beautifully. If you like it, give her a thumbs up. Another reason I include her post her is it was at the bottom of a sub-thread where it might not get the attention I think it deserves.

Jane79 wrote:

What I am doing, and perhaps Paul too, and aftab, and maybe some others, is give a different perspective.

If your marketing campaign gets ~1500 NEGATIVE comments on the largest online plattform for one of the advertised products within 24 hours, and the negative to positive ratings ratio of the commercials on Youtube is 8:1 with 100% of comments being negative, then something has gone terribly wrong with your campaign. You can film an ant sitting on your knee with a camera phone and get better feedback and ratings on Youtube.

This campaign is a major failure on pretty much every level:

1. There is no clear message. Where others see possible, Canon sees impossible? What? Canon does not see what "naysayers" and "it cannot be done!" types see? But those are the very people seeing "impossible"! Confused yet? Are they trying to say that where all the others are seeing "impossible", Canon is actually seeing "possible"? Make up your mind!
   -
2. A countdown counts down to an event. If the event is advertised as being something "impossible", then people watching will expect something at least interesting, some will even expect to see something impressive, like, you know, "impossible". Obviously two very 80's commercials won't cut it, so you're setting everybody up for a disappointment. When the campaign finally gets off the ground, your customers are all disappointed. Not exactly what most brands are aiming for.
   -
3. Insulting the intelligence of your customers is a bad idea. Everybody knows that the one-in-a-million self-published besteseller has absolutely nothing to do with the printer the manuscript or the print-on-demand paperback was printed on. The idea is really really preposterous and does not deserve to be made into a commercial. It's the same with the wornout romantic idea that all you need to do to make your son or daughter into the next Oscar winning Stephen Spielberg is buying him/her a Canon camera. Everybody knows that it's not the camera. Respecting your customers instead of insulting them is a good idea.

So yes, this campaign is ill-conceived, but let's not lose perspective. Canon is a giant in the history of photography and can be proud of its contribution to the craft. Great cameras and lenses carry the Canon name, a name that has earned the respect of both photographers and competitors over the course of more than half a century of innovation in the field of imaging. This poor campaign by some NYC advertising agency is insignificant, it has nothing to do with Canon's past achievements, and it has nothing to do with the Canon engineers right now working on the cameras and lenses that will take great, haunting, unforgettable, sad, beautiful pictures in the future, when this campaign will be long forgotten.

 

[PhotoKhan]

If they had released this marketing campaign without a needless countdown, I'm sure it would be better accepted.

Or without the grandiloquent copy about "Impossible" that only acted (acts) as a "fact-checker" for their current positioning.

Here in Europe a similar brand communication readjustment is being deployed without countdowns and a simple "Come and See" message and, guess what?, it is running smoothly.

PK

 

[ppires85]

If they had released this marketing campaign without a needless countdown, I'm sure it would be better accepted.

Or without the grandiloquent copy about "Impossible" that only acted (acts) as a "fact-checker" for their current positioning.

Here in Europe a similar brand communication readjustment is being deployed without countdowns and a simple "Come and See" message and, guess what?, it is running smoothly.

PK

--
“Loose praise may feed my ego but constructive criticism advances my skills”
************************************************************
-------------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/photokhan
(PBase Supporter)
-------------------------------------------------

Market messages tend to be "grandiloquent". The problem is that it really mismatched the expectations. So it goes from something that should be interesting, as a message about achievements, opportunity, bonds and story into something "delusional". A market campaign that becomes a "delusional" message is a serious backfire. But we really tend to associate butter with, family, warmer feelings, freedom, health, beauty, calmness, nature and other evil things. I'm really sure everybody working with marketing is pretty much condemned to hell ]=D. I hope I can find an open bar down there.

 

[Timbukto]

I am annoyed that Canon isn't the most well-run company, but hey with companions like Nikon, Sony, Olympus, and Panasonic, its par for course.

Things I used to complain about was with all the iterations of the Canon Rebels the use different button shapes and mode dials and decals for all of them. I would never invest in a camera company, but if I did I would be wondering why Canon or any other manufacturer would want to make up additional SKU parts for things that are *identical* in purpose and have no real bearing on anything except to increase manufacturing cost, inventory costs, and repair costs? Tim Cook and Apple execs with throw up a little in their mouths when thinking of why any manufacturer would purposely invent additional SKU for parts that are nearly identical but not for camera's that are nearly identical but not.

Stupid.

Likewise their marketing is overpriced and ineffective as well...I've been saying for a long time that if they want more effective marketing, go more grassroots and sponsor or donate gear to young but upcoming rising stars of youtubers, etc. Why would *anyone* voluntarily go to an advertisement site?

But obviously Canon does not have a patent on stupid when it comes to business operations. Nikon and their D600 is an example as is Olympus and their financial fraud.

Here is a big stupid...letting an American in his garage build a simple video camera with significant market cap when you've had that technology in your backpocket for *years*.

Sony at best makes gear that will turn your head, but as a business they are still pretty stupid too and I wouldn't invest a dime there either. Remember its a company that let Apple steal thunder in consumer electronics because they were too stuck making minidiscs instead of mp3 players (perhaps bogged down by influence of Sony Music/Movies). They let TV's go to Samsung too...who wants a heavy Wega tube TV? So really Canon does not monopolize corporate stupidity.

Look to Samsung to be particularly aggressive with their FPS/AF and telephoto lenses...the shoot out between Sony and Samsung is only going to be a good thing for consumers. Samsung is always the sleeping giant and they aren't that stupid with business...remember half of the sushi restaurants you go to is actually Korean owned, not Japanese.

 

[WalterSrChat]

Or is it just me?

I had a lot of respect for Canon but that advertising fiasco was deflating.

 

[Timbukto]

Or is it just me?

I had a lot of respect for Canon but that advertising fiasco was deflating.

 

[Mr Ed M]

I think I understood what you were getting at reasonably well PK.

But my apologies if you feel I'm simply 'rushing' to contradict you. That was not my intention.

Could you tell me what, say, Nikon have done, apart from using EXMOR technology column-parallel ADC's and smaller pixels, that would put them in a much stronger position wrt innovation?

Or is it just the fact that Canon don't currently use this construction that means they are in a "week" (sic) position?

I'm not saying you are wrong, I just don't agree with the magnitude inherent in your post.

And I've seen your work so, whatever cameras you do use, along with your skill and eye, are doing a fantastic job, whatever technology they utilise.

I recently went back and read some posts from when past cameras were released. The same bemoaning the demise of Canon.

Yet when those cameras actually get in peoples hands and they start shooting in the real world, Canon just keeps looking better and better.

It is almost like the Canon detractors shoot themselves in the foot. They set the expectations so low, that when people actually use the cameras they are floored by how well they perform.

Hehe!

You may be right.

There is no doubt in my mind that the EXMOR type sensor tech is a better design and implementation - though it has some downsides too IMHO, at least as it has been so far implemented (though it is improving). But it would be hard to deny that, at least at base ISO, it is able to deliver admirable DR and resolution.

And it would be of great interest to me, at least, to see what Canon could do with this technology. But we will have to wait and see about that. Maybe they will go in a different direction entirely. And maybe it will have other advantages and disadvantages. But, to my mind, it's good that they are doing their own thing and not just 'jumping on the bandwagon' - even if it is perceived by some (I think a small number in the scheme of things) to be contributing to some impending demise.

I think there is a perception by some, and they may be right or maybe not, that complaining on forums will 'coerce' Canon into producing the type of camera that they think, or know, they want. I'm not convinced of that - but it might be so. I rather think Canon is listen more to professionals who make money with their gear and via other sources. And maybe they don't do that as well as they should either. But they are still making terrifically capable cameras and still have a healthy market share.

I know I'm not too popular here amongst some for my take on things - and I try not to push it too much - just joining in on occasion when I feel a bit of perspective might be in order. Much like a few others have done here.

To put the record straight - I hope that Canon do bring out a high DR high resolution camera for those who do, or feel they do, need it. Doing so certainly won't hurt them unless the investment required does not translate into a sensible and sustainable amount of sales etc. And I rather think they have at least as good a handle on that equation as anyone here on this forum. ;-)

Yes, there is a difference, but, is it a meaningful difference?

I think this post by aftab sums it up pretty well.

We all have different takes on this hotly debated issue. I will share my experience here.

I am a long time Canon user. I bought D600 soon after it was released. I have 3 lenses, Nikon 14-24/2.8, Sigma 35mm Art and the kit lens. Looking back I can clearly see the phases I have gone through after buying D600.

Phase 1: I would call it pure testing phase. All I was doing in this phase was intentionally underexposing different scenes with D600, 6D and 5DIII and then lifting shadows. I discovered what most of us already knew; shadow areas of the D600 files were simply cleaner, 6D was better than 5DIII.

Phase 2: Bored of pure testing, I thought I would do some real life comparison shots for shadow lifting with three cameras I mentioned above. I found out that it was extremely difficult to come across real life shots that needed excessive shadow lifting, almost always I was manufacturing the shots. Anyways, I noticed that in daylight high contrast scenes Canon cameras didn't have much problem in shadow lifting (even 3 to 4 stops), it had more problem in the sunset scenes, but D600 had problem in these scenarios too, but it was better. During this phase I realized that it is always better to resort to alternative techniques (such as exposure blending) in these situations than rely on single exposure and excessive shadow lifting. D600 RAW files I posted earlier are from this phase.

Phase 3: In this phase I would take two cameras, D600 and one Canon, to do 'normal' shooting. During this time I noticed few things. In daylight scenes and most other scenes Canon files looked better. They had more contrast, more pop, no green cast, more pleasing skin tone etc. For general shooting I needed to do more processing with D600 files.

Phase 4: My current phase. No more comparison, no more shooting the same scene with two cameras. Doing photography for reasons I always did. I kinda feel 'liberated'. Fun in photography is back again. More than 90% of the time I am using 5DIII. It simply is my most favorite camera. If I use D600 it is not for its sensor, it is because I want to use one of those two lenses, Nikon 14-24 and Sigma 35.

So, what is I am trying to say?

1. Does Exmor produce cleaner shadows? Yes.

2. How useful is it? Depends of what you shoot and how you shoot. For me it has virtually no use.

3. Should Canon improve read noise? Yes. But I think a lot more important is high ISO noise and high ISO DR, they should be improved further. As things stand now latest Canon sensors are just fine (or even better in most situations with the absence of color casting and with better contrast) for most people including myself.

 

[Timbukto]

Funniest thing ever.

 

[PhotoKhan]

Funniest thing ever.

It's both very funny and very lame.

Funny because the way the text is presented and read aloud in that "trailer voice" really accentuates the douchbaginess of the copy.

Lame because the full text was only the lead in for the teaser and only a condensed version is now there, playing as the claim for the access page.

So the whole "logic" of the sketch "plays" wrong.

PK

 

[Timbukto]

Funniest thing ever.

It's both very funny and very lame.

Funny because the way the text is presented and read aloud in that "trailer voice" really accentuates the douchbaginess of the copy.

Lame because the full text was only the lead in for the teaser and only a condensed version is now there, playing as the claim for the access page.

So the whole "logic" of the sketch "plays" wrong.

PK

 

[WalterSrChat]

Funniest thing ever.

I like It

Excellent Advertisement!

Remember to keep you sense of humor. ;-)

Walter Sr.

--
I am out to take the perfect picture, if it exits!

 

[joger]

Canon has other business beside cameras. Considering the ad had nothing to do with photography equipment, I don't get what the concern is about. Have fun worrying about it though.

it clearly indicates how much quality oriented photographers are unhappy with the product policy of Canon.

I guess the other businesses don't create as much enthusiasm as the camera division does for many of us (photographers)

remind me which businesses are there to create a real hype?

• Large format printers?
• Scanners?
• Professional film cameras for a lucky few high end film crews
• other professional equipment

/missing some areas of their business for sure

Canon has disappointed many users throughout the past years.