Canon...Wake Up...you are down and the

KEITH-C said:

The point which Canon defenders seem to ignore is that they could
earn tremendous respect if they unleashed the 300Ds full potential.

Click to expand...

I'd rather see Canon spend the time and money that would go to releasaing a firmware upgrade developing the next great camera or adding features to the photoediting software. They have very little to gain releasing a patch that only a tiney portion of the user base wants.

KEITH-C said:

The message that would go out is that buying a Canon is a good
investment not just a means of keeping the shareholders happy in
one particular year.

Click to expand...

Your DR still does everything it did when it was new - you haven't lost anything. Newer Canon lenses work with it, as do other accessories - so it's still a very capable camera.

KEITH-C said:

Short term profit is great but long term respect is worth more than
just money. Go on Canon - DO IT !!

Click to expand...

Profit is the reason Canon exists - if releasing an update would generate sales and a return on the money spent, they should do it. I don't think it would, so it makes no sense (IMHO) for them to spend the money.

Jim Coffey said:

Jim Coffey said:

Short term profit is great but long term respect is worth more than
just money. Go on Canon - DO IT !!

Click to expand...

Profit is the reason Canon exists - if releasing an update would
generate sales and a return on the money spent, they should do it.
I don't think it would, so it makes no sense (IMHO) for them to
spend the money.

Click to expand...

You're right, Jim, but Keith's point is still a very valid one. Unleashing existing 300d's features by a firmware update would cost Canon a ridiculously small amount of money (compared to their huge R&D and marketing budgets) but would score them tremendous sympathy points with their existing users. And happy users today will most likely translate into eager customers in the future. Conversely, ignoring your current customer base by only catering to a prospective clientele is short-sighted and will return less revenue in the long run.

(The big caveat in the dSLR domain is that users who have made big investments into lenses will probably stick with whatever brand they've started out with, even though they dislike the company's marketing schemes.)
Regards,
Hans

hnz said:

hnz said:

Profit is the reason Canon exists - if releasing an update would
generate sales and a return on the money spent, they should do it.
I don't think it would, so it makes no sense (IMHO) for them to
spend the money.

Click to expand...

You're right, Jim, but Keith's point is still a very valid one.
Unleashing existing 300d's features by a firmware update would cost
Canon a ridiculously small amount of money (compared to their huge
R&D and marketing budgets) but would score them tremendous sympathy
points with their existing users. And happy users today will most
likely translate into eager customers in the future. Conversely,
ignoring your current customer base by only catering to a
prospective clientele is short-sighted and will return less revenue
in the long run.

Click to expand...

While I agree it would garner them brownie points with some customers, I'm not convinced a significant percentage of the DR user base wants, or is even aware of, the extar features. My guess is that most of those who want them have installed the hack, so Canon would gain very little benefit; even if the cost is small overall it's strictly an expense. I'm not sure it's all that small, since releasing the update would require testing it thouroughly and fixing the workarounds in the hack. Canon can't simply release their version of the hack - what is acceptable for a 3rd part hack would probably result in an outcry of "Canon diodn't test this enough," "Why doesn't X work (or work right?"

Would I like them to relase one? You bet, especially if it had second curtain synch (which, along with the higher burst rate / startup is why I added an xt to my kit); but I can see why it makes sense not to.

MLU in Nikon terms is "sensor cleaning mechanism" and it's available on the D70/s
Cheers
--
Andrew
http://lpta.smugmug.com/
Smugmug coupon code: P398zmgQ5QBQw

Jim Coffey said:

Profit is the reason Canon exists - if releasing an update would
generate sales and a return on the money spent, they should do it.
I don't think it would, so it makes no sense (IMHO) for them to
spend the money.

Click to expand...

Jim, at least you got it right. I am sure Canon has looked at all the angles and you can bet that if they could profit from a firmware upgrade (not to be confused with a fix), it would have been done already.
--
Photo Gallary @ http://muggle.smugmug.com/

ohyva said:

You buy a budget car from ford. The previous or next model has a
more powerfull engine. Has Ford the duty to give you the more
powerfull engine?

Click to expand...

But what if Ford made two cars that were pretty similar but with very different prices, so they detach the CD player, the heated seats, etc? The extras are there, just not available unless the firmware is tweaked.

--
Ricardo
http://photobucket.com/albums/v389/notornis/

bauerman said:

........is already availabe in the other versions of the firmware
that have already been made available to everyone. I don't need
the firmware to have Canon's name on it to use it or benefit from
it. I have had a ton of added features available on my 300D since
the second day I had it!

Click to expand...

But modifying with unoffical firmware will essentially void your warranty.
--
Ricardo
http://photobucket.com/albums/v389/notornis/

cornel4web said:

you are right...but you can think also...I didn't ask for 9 focus
point or for 8 Mp...but if you buy your Ford Fiesta with an Mondeo
engine, capable of 200 HP, you will gonna ask Ford to give you the
key to unleash that power wich is in your hand...also TV's...if
your TV can do PIP but becouse of some restrictions the salesman
block that option in menu, you can ask to remove that...so ...think
again...

Click to expand...

Actually, this happens all the time in consumer electronics. I worked for a major electronics firm, and our products routinely had features disabled, slowed down, or tweaked for the "lower priced" model. It doesn't make sense, but economically it does to the company - they make 1 PC Board, and sell it as 3 products. You are getting the product you paid for - you just happened to pay someone to turn off, or not enable some features. .

Suck it up, kid, I guess it what I'd suggest if I were mean, but really I just suggest loading the hack.

-Dan
The man with a "crippled" Fuji F700 - really bad JPEG's... :-(.

Funny, the camera is clearly able to raise the mirrow, so what HW constraint prevent it to rise it a bit earlier than the shutter is released. Must some odd sort of HW design.

I do not know what other information there may be presented in the D70 forum but the answer below seems mostly indicate "yeah, yeah, we do not care to study this" although put in some nicer "customer support standard phrases".

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion Thread
Response (Julian Hollingshead) 06/04/2005 03:46 PM
Dear Sir,

The D70 mirror lockup facility is, as you mention, aimed at the cleaning of the CCD and will also lock the shutter open. I will certainly pass your request to the relevant department for consideration, but it may not be possible to implement easily into the camera.

Regards

Julian Hollingshead
Nikon Customer Support
Customer (Entered by Maria Sardone) 04/04/2005 08:08 AM

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Indicative enough they asked the person not to give out the email address direct to Nicon Customer Support so that they do not have to hear more of the "MLU whines".

Frank C. said:

there is no way of enabling mlu on the d70 because
of hardware considerations, this was debated at length
in the d70 forum

Click to expand...

What's the point? Stop complaining and just buy Nikon.

What he said is right, the potential is there.
The hacks are there.

ok.. so Canon isn't as generous as Nikon is to give you faster auto-focus.

If you got a VW 1.8T engine, you had the same choice, buy a new chip and get the Turbo ratio up. it'll void your warranty, so fine, u swap the chip when you take the car in for servicing. Plenty of people do this to their Jetta / Golf / Beetle..

now you have the hack. The choice is yours. Go use it.

Or buy Nikon next time. And show Canon you really care about what you said.

My dealer will not give my Toyota a firmware upgrade. Newer models have features I want. Who do I call about this?

Sal

Frank C. said:

The D70 ccd is not a Sony product but Sanyo instead, with
technical collaboration/input from Nikon. Please get the facts
straight
before posting

Click to expand...

No, the D70 uses the Sony ICX413AQ image chip, just as the D100 did. Look it up. The Sony ICX413AQ image chip is also found in the Pentax DSLRs, too, and I believe the Minolta DSLR (also I'm not 100% certain about the Minolta). Get YOUR facts straight before posting. And in terms of "technical collaboration/input from Nikon", I wouldn't make too much of that. We'll probably be seeing the Sony 12mp chip currently used in the D2X popping up in other DSLR cameras, too.

Rendrat said:

Thank you for the correction.

Even if D70 CCD is made by Sanyo, still Canon is not down because
of a firmmware released by Nikon.

Click to expand...

No, you were right. The D70's CCD is made by Sony, not Sanyo.

cornel4web said:

cornel4web said:

Even if D70 CCD is made by Sanyo, still Canon is not down because
of a firmmware released by Nikon.

Click to expand...

Definetly not, and we don't want this...but it's about RESPECT for
those who make the Canon where is now, even by buying an DR...

Click to expand...

Any time someone says it's about "respect", it's usually not. Canon shows respect for their customers by constantly introducing improved products with greater value. That's all one can ask from any company. And it's something that Canon does regularly, and does well. They did it by introducing the first sub-$1000 DSLR on the market. They did it by being at the forefront of pushing the price of DSLR cameras lower and lower. They did it by pushing technology faster than any other manufacturer. That's why Canon is such a dominant brand. If you don't like it, you're always free to take your money elsewhere.

or my DirectV receivers should show me all the premium channels, but guess what, i'm not paying for it, so they lock me out from watching it, but hey you don't see me crying for that...

--
Andrew
http://lpta.smugmug.com/
Smugmug coupon code: P398zmgQ5QBQw

ohyva said:

Are you kidding?

Click to expand...

No, why?

I'm just saying -- there are a lot of threads on here that bash Canon's "crippled" firmware and cause a stir about how it's a slap in the face to their customers. I knew exactly what I was getting when I bought the Rebel, we all did. We all thought it was worth the price, so we bought it. I doubt many of us bought it with the expectation that we'd be getting some new firmware down the line that would improve on its flaws.

I'd love for Canon to release some new firmware that improves whatever needs improving, I just don't think they will. But does that mean they're screwing us all over? I don't see how.

• Eric

I agree.

Theoretical Situation:

Let's say you buy a 100GB hard drive. Then you find out that the manufacturer only makes one 300GB hard drive, they just use firmware to make drives that only use 100GB, 150GB, 200GB, etc, of that original 300GB capacity. They sell the 100GB for $80, and the 300GB for $200. They only make one drive because it's cheaper to manufacture than several seperate drives.

Would you feel "ripped off" if you payed $200 for the 300GB? How about if a firmware hack came out that converted the 100GB drives to 300GB?

Maybe Canon's biggest mistake was leaving the firmware open enough to hack it. Nobody would have ever known.

• Eric

KEITH-C said:

This is not a Canon v Nikon issue in any sense - it's just the fact
that Nikon have had the decency to offer existing users some extra
facilities that they have included in a newly refined model. Why
should anyone want to rubbish the gesture - surely something of
that nature should be praised & encouraged.

Keith-C

Click to expand...

The thing is, companies typically don't make nice gestures unless it will somehow get them more money down the line. Nikon apparently either saw a potential for lost customers, and/or calculated that such a release wouldn't take away sales from other models.

I don't think that Canon is in a position to make such a gesture, because I don't think they stand to benefit as much financially. That's really what these kind of decisions come down to, don't you think?

• Eric

See the following;

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=9637206