-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
G2 AF - a joke?
- Thread starter Agostino
- Start date
I think that sentence right there kind of blows your credibility out the water. Unless you are really joking.
I can go and buy any camera out there (have some). Use it for a few weeks. That means diddly squat.
Broke twice on you? The Cp5000 can induce lots of aggravation for the user. Tell us really, how far did you throw it each time? We won't tell. The salesman bought the story each time?
Er....reading comprehension would help here. Just a thought.
It broke on you twice. How can you work a broken camera. You pulling my chain again??? You. You. You eljoker you.
As I peruse the other forums it is rare to see a Canon camera user bashing the Nikons, Minoltas or Sonys. But in this forum I see Sony, Nikon, and Minolta users bashing the Canons on a regular basis. Wonder if they are just trying to justify their own purchases? Seems to me if I had one of those cameras I would be spending my time better hanging out in those forums learning to be a better photographer vice knocking the competitions' products every chance they get. Trying to make your product look better but knocking someone elses does little to enhance credibility!
--
Have a great day
http://www.pbase.com/wp12001
--
Have a great day
http://www.pbase.com/wp12001
N
Negative287
Guest
Lets face it, you have no real argument so you resort to this.
However, if you must know...
First, there was condensation in the "Condensation free lens".
Second, the replacement was making a cracking noise and because I bought the extended warranty I was allowed to get my money back from Ritz (I don't know if this is standard policy or not).
None of that really matters though as you still haven't used any of the other cameras I've mentioned.
--
http://www.pbase.com/elterrible
However, if you must know...
First, there was condensation in the "Condensation free lens".
Second, the replacement was making a cracking noise and because I bought the extended warranty I was allowed to get my money back from Ritz (I don't know if this is standard policy or not).
None of that really matters though as you still haven't used any of the other cameras I've mentioned.
--
http://www.pbase.com/elterrible
Ruffian
Senior Member
Pete, that's really poor luck you got there, but not quite as bad as What Digital Camera got with the three Coolpix 88x's.
If you read the whole thing, Will, you'd know what he's talking about. It's one thing to say a camera sucks. It's a completely different matter to say that Pete Perry's talking like a ***** just because you don't like what he's saying.
I think you have some very serious issues. Shall I report that to Phil Askey and let him kick you out of HIS forums?
In retrospect, where are you and your brain when you typed this line?
Stop baiting Pete, you know this isn't giving you the title "King of the Hill", whatever the chances.
--
http://printerboyweb.net/G2
This guy Pete use to post under the name elterrible. He was bashing the G2 long before he got his hands on one for a short time. I wonder why he even bothered. Maybe to give his trolling some validity. He even has a reputation in the Nikon forum.
He does not extend the same courtesy to posters who disagree with his camera. He made this comment to a poster: "just go back to your forum, we like our camera here (CP5000)".
He does not extend the same courtesy to posters who disagree with his camera. He made this comment to a poster: "just go back to your forum, we like our camera here (CP5000)".
I've read several of the comments on your original message - interesting feedback . For what it's worth, sometimes (rarely) I have AF issues when I use the macro mode. And sometimes in poorly-lit environments (a bar for example taking photos of live bands). I really enjoy the camera though. Maybe there will be a firmware update to make this camera nearly perfect.
Rarely a problem for me - but I have experienced it.
Rarely a problem for me - but I have experienced it.
Resort to what? If you do not want to see something, no one can make you.
Blah blah blah blah blah.
See the other post. That reading comprehension thing again.
You always want to knock the king off the hill. There is some G2 envy there. For a long time the G2 picture quality has been looked at by some people as a benchmark of sorts. Phil kind of alluded to that in his review of the Cp5000. The Cp500 didn't get a good review from Phil. So maybe there is some animosity from Nikon owners. But don't blame the G2 for that. Go blame Nikon.
To each his'her own. Some people find the Cp5000 unacceptable. I suppose if you don't like a camera you just do not buy it. Or return it.
Cheap point and shoots can most likely focus better than the vast majority of cameras in this class including the Coolpixes with the slow lens.
Betcha a bigger tube comes with the Cp5000
N
Negative287
Guest
I stated all along my intent to buy the camera! You called me a liar and said that my story was made up. Well, it wasn't and now you still don't get that do you! I heard the edges were soft on the focus of the G2 but I never heard about pictures being completely out of focus. So, I bought one for my wife and that is when I realized the camera had more issues then I had first thought but... Either way, he's right you have issues.
As for the Nikon forum... Actually it was really just you we didn't extend a hearty welcome to.
As for the name change, the forums did that when I decided not to have my e-mail present.
--
http://www.pbase.com/elterrible
As for the Nikon forum... Actually it was really just you we didn't extend a hearty welcome to.
As for the name change, the forums did that when I decided not to have my e-mail present.
--
http://www.pbase.com/elterrible
I get you very well. You are not fooling anyone.
I called you for what you were. You are a hypocrite. When someone went to the Nikon forum to say something that was not positive you told the poster to get lost. And here you are. Every chance you get, you are here bashing the G2. You look for an opportunity, any excuse - and it's feeding time. You seem to be in all the negative threads here AND you don't like the camera. What are you doing here??
Yes, you are a funny guy.
Try to pull a fast one with that comment. Unfortunately, the comment I quoted from you was not addressed to me (your memory is really selective). So, there you go making things up again.
One poster in the Nikon forum remarked, "I wonder what (trouble) elterrible is up to now...". You have a reputation. Another mentioned, "....until I read it was posted by elterrible". Like I said, you have a reputation.
blah blah blah blah blah see above
B
Bob Williams
Guest
Tom, it seems that the AF in macro mode problem is the
two green sensors balanced against one red and one blue.
On flower shots, the G1 will almost always lock onto the Green
part of the image, no matter where it is located, or how
small a part of the image it is. I appears this is just another bayer
artifact that we are about to see leave the field as the
Foveon sensors take over. The G1, and the G2 from the
reports, are both bad about this in macro mode.
I suspect that a lot of the point and shoot, it did not focus,
complaints would be quite easy to solve with the EXIF provided
if people would look. The same exact complaints were made about
the G1, and it was always in ISO 50 mode. Pay no attention to
JimC on this issue, and his rude comments. He thinks he is a
camera reviewer. He did the same thing in the Minolta forum for
months. It is just too much booze or something. Elterrible
is a troll, nothing else, and this is just his latest attack. He has
already been to the Minolta forum, and apparently from the
discussion, the Nikon forum too. This kind of posting is his
speciality.
two green sensors balanced against one red and one blue.
On flower shots, the G1 will almost always lock onto the Green
part of the image, no matter where it is located, or how
small a part of the image it is. I appears this is just another bayer
artifact that we are about to see leave the field as the
Foveon sensors take over. The G1, and the G2 from the
reports, are both bad about this in macro mode.
I suspect that a lot of the point and shoot, it did not focus,
complaints would be quite easy to solve with the EXIF provided
if people would look. The same exact complaints were made about
the G1, and it was always in ISO 50 mode. Pay no attention to
JimC on this issue, and his rude comments. He thinks he is a
camera reviewer. He did the same thing in the Minolta forum for
months. It is just too much booze or something. Elterrible
is a troll, nothing else, and this is just his latest attack. He has
already been to the Minolta forum, and apparently from the
discussion, the Nikon forum too. This kind of posting is his
speciality.
Jim K53618
Senior Member
Will what's wrong with NOT liking the G2? I don't like it either! And I will admit any chance I have to say so I will. I also don't mind telling why I don't like it too. I think it's very over rated and a under performer. Now I'll sing praises for the D30 and D60 till the cows come home because there is alot of really great things about those cameras. I also like the S200, S330, S40 and the Pro90. So it's not a Canon bash at all. I simply do NOT like the G2 or the 1D. IMHO they are a major disapointment, and I don't mind saying so any chance I get. I feel since I've had 3 G2's, and 2 1D's I'm entitled to speak from personal experience. Unlike others, I show no brand loyalty. I also own Nikon's, Sony's, Minolta's, Oly's, and Fuji's. I own a D1X and D1H, but I use my D60 more then either Nikon's! I prefer my CP5000 over the G2 because despite it's short comings, it can focus, and it does it well even without a focus assist light. I don't care for the E10 or E20, or Minolta D7's and never fail to mention it when the opportunity rises. I like the F707, and Fuji 602 and also say so when ever it's appropriate. In short, it's nothing personal for me, I simply call it as I see it, and don't give a rat's @ss who makes it or what people think about it. You call it bashing? I call it being honest and unbiased.
Regards!
Regards!
Oh, here is another quip from elterrible who "loves" the G2:
".. know what it is! The canon's have ruined his eyes! It must be tough having to blur your own vision to make your pictures seem sharp (G2 owner no doubt)!
--
Pete Perry
---------------------
http://www.pbase.com/elterrible
".. know what it is! The canon's have ruined his eyes! It must be tough having to blur your own vision to make your pictures seem sharp (G2 owner no doubt)!
--
Pete Perry
---------------------
http://www.pbase.com/elterrible
B
Bob Williams
Guest
Wait just a minute. I use nothing but RAW, unless forced to use
a smaller storage option. Then, I still use RAW for anything I am
going to keep, or really care about. RAW and a custom ICC designed
for that specific camera is the only way to go if you want the best.
This is where this conversation breaks down. You shout about
wanting the best, and in the next breath state that you don't use
the tools to achieve the best, because they are too much trouble, or
the file sizes are too large. You can't have it both ways. Either you
want the best, or you want easy. If you want easy, the Sony is the
right choice, or maybe even the Fuji, as they produce about the same
quality images. If you want the best, then shut up and learn. It
isn't available to a Sony owner, or a Fuji owner.
a smaller storage option. Then, I still use RAW for anything I am
going to keep, or really care about. RAW and a custom ICC designed
for that specific camera is the only way to go if you want the best.
This is where this conversation breaks down. You shout about
wanting the best, and in the next breath state that you don't use
the tools to achieve the best, because they are too much trouble, or
the file sizes are too large. You can't have it both ways. Either you
want the best, or you want easy. If you want easy, the Sony is the
right choice, or maybe even the Fuji, as they produce about the same
quality images. If you want the best, then shut up and learn. It
isn't available to a Sony owner, or a Fuji owner.
N
Negative287
Guest
Here's the one that proceeds that... Many people have said the images are soft on the edges... That again is what I was refering to! When I got the camera, I realized the focus was a lot worse and I was actually being nice. However, as one other person posted... All the pictures they took with the CP5700 (same basic design as the CP5000) were in focus!
He's just upset cause some of his own (and some of us ) are calling the G2 images soft!
--
Pete Perry
---------------------
http://www.pbase.com/elterrible
He's just upset cause some of his own (and some of us
) are calling the G2 images soft!--
Pete Perry
---------------------
http://www.pbase.com/elterrible
N
Negative287
Guest
Will, when I came over here I was researching the G2. Then you started accusing me of being the guy that "started that forum"... When in fact, that was Doug Russo and you guys were abusing him for speaking up against the G2. Well, that thread, that you're refering to below, was so obviously someone trying to stir up trouble and they all knew it and that is why the guy took heat.
As for Ken asking what I was up to, I e-mail Ken sometimes and he didn't know I bought a G2. That's why he was asking what I was up to posting over here.
However, for the record let me also state that Doug Rousso rated the G2 a (2) in that AF poll; remember he started the thread where I called the focus soft.
As for what Jim K. said... He's right, I don't like the camera either and there isn't a thing you can do about that! So, I'll just keep telling people about my experience with it and let you have your say. But at least I tried or owned the cameras that I speak about and you can't even say that.
Now about being a hypocrite... Is that like complaining about a camera you've never used?
Oh and note the use of the word "Sharp" in that other posting indicating "Softness" or soft edges... That was only a small part of what I had experienced when I bought the G2.
By the way, where are your pictures?
--
http://www.pbase.com/elterrible
As for Ken asking what I was up to, I e-mail Ken sometimes and he didn't know I bought a G2. That's why he was asking what I was up to posting over here.
However, for the record let me also state that Doug Rousso rated the G2 a (2) in that AF poll; remember he started the thread where I called the focus soft.
As for what Jim K. said... He's right, I don't like the camera either and there isn't a thing you can do about that! So, I'll just keep telling people about my experience with it and let you have your say. But at least I tried or owned the cameras that I speak about and you can't even say that.
Now about being a hypocrite... Is that like complaining about a camera you've never used?
Oh and note the use of the word "Sharp" in that other posting indicating "Softness" or soft edges... That was only a small part of what I had experienced when I bought the G2.
By the way, where are your pictures?
--
http://www.pbase.com/elterrible
N
Negative287
Guest
Truth be told, I did use the Raw some but I've found nothing while using RAW that can't be achieved using imaging programs and Tif. However, I still wouldn't use it 100% of the time.
This is just a matter of choice and when you look at what the RAW programs offer, I really didn't see anything that I couldn't accomplish using a tif... Maybe I'm wrong but it was just my experience with the file type.
Tif is an excellent image format without artifacts and low noise... I can set sharpening way back in the camera if I choose to do so and then sharpen on the PC but it all depends on what I'm doing. However, for me that isn't a make or break feature and the Sony Image quality is the new standard that other consumer or prosumer cameras are judged by (this is seen on all the popular review sites).
--
http://www.pbase.com/elterrible
This is just a matter of choice and when you look at what the RAW programs offer, I really didn't see anything that I couldn't accomplish using a tif... Maybe I'm wrong but it was just my experience with the file type.
Tif is an excellent image format without artifacts and low noise... I can set sharpening way back in the camera if I choose to do so and then sharpen on the PC but it all depends on what I'm doing. However, for me that isn't a make or break feature and the Sony Image quality is the new standard that other consumer or prosumer cameras are judged by (this is seen on all the popular review sites).
--
http://www.pbase.com/elterrible
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum