Reading mode: Light Dark

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

Go to last post
Phil, I can only speak for myself. Your reviews are detailed and your effort is great. As I said before, it is in your conclusions where I am surprised at times. I guess we just think differently. You posted links about the CA problems with some of the Canons, yet in the conclusion of the C50 review you sounded like it was only Olympus cameras. May be that was not what you meant, but that is where I see your bias. but as I said before, you have the right to your bias. I understand that before I read your reviews. I don't mind the anti-other-cameras except for Olympus, I am pro bias towards Olympus. I wonder if you are ever going to write a review on the new Olympus Stylus Digital. I just bought the Stylus 300 and love it. BTW, we know none of these cameras are perfect and that you are doing a good job, but-never-the-less you are bias and so are we.
Phil Askey said:
Denis K said:
Phil Askey said:
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.
Denis K said:
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
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
--
C700uz, E100rs, Stylus 300
http://www.pbase.com/gene
Life is just a stage and we all have enough pictures to proof it!
 
I personally feel that Phil may not be as fond of Olympus as he may be of others. That seems to be supported by his final verdicts at the end of his reveiws. But, EVERYONE has a bias one way or another on subjects that they care about. You show me a single person without an opinion, and I will spend the next 5 hours trying to find their pulse!

When you talk to a professional mechanic, they are bound to be biased tword a particular brand of vehicle, be it right or wrong. If you talk with a stock broaker, they will always favor particular types of stocks that are near and dear to their hearts. And, when you speak with a professional photographer they will ALWAYS have particular equiptment that they feel is better for some reason or another. All these opinions are bound to be based on past experiences and will almost always overflow into their future decisions and recomendations.

So, Phil may not give Olympus his flaming stamp of approval on Olympus as often as he does on Canon. That is his preference to do so and is based on his "opinion." But, what Phil does do is lay out MOUNTAINS of unbiased information. Pages upon pages of it for everyone to see and examine and to form their own "opinions" on.

Everyone has different needs and wants and weigh them each differently when hunting for the perfect camera. Some think that zoom is more imprtant than file size. Some are willing to live with a little more CA in order for a little more clarity. Personally, I chose to buy a 5050 even though Phil thought that it was not nearly so good as the 717 or the smaller MP'ed G-3. I went with Olympus because I thought that it had a much more vibrant color reproduciton that brought photos to life and allowed me to make all the adjustments in the camera itself to make each photo my own. As opposed the the lifeless and dead color reproduction of the Sony and the "rubber-stamped", "plain vanilla" performance of the Canon. But, I was able to form that opinion based on the information given in Phil's extensive review.

If all you read is the conclusion, you will aways get the author's biased opinion. No matter how hard they try to hide it, it will always come through. If you take the time to look at the information and aren't too lazy to form an opinion of your own, you will almost always make the best decision for you, no matter what a website, magazine, or "professional" might tell you.

IMHO!!!!!!

--
New and learning while having a GREAT time!

 
Here I present the final total score and conclusion from Phil's review for the cameras below. I think these cameras belong to similar catergory.
Nikon 5700: 51 Highly recommended
Sony F717: 51 Highly recommended
Canon G3: 53.5 Highly recommended
Oly c5050: 51.5 Recommended
Minolta 7i: 51.5 Highly recommended
Sony F707: 52 Highly recommended
Minolta 7Hi: 47.5 Recommended

among these 7 cameras, c5050 is in the second place, but it got a "recommended" there're four cameras had a lower score, three of them have "highly recommended" conclusion.

may be they are not really belong to same catergory, and the scores are not that important. I still want to compare this. I still think it's unfair to c5050.
Denis K said:
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
Click to expand...
 
sorry, the score of c5050 should be in the third place.
cxy02 said:
Denis K said:
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
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
These ratings (recommended, highly recommended) are subject to being biased, and they probably are. Not by any intentional act by Phil, but just based on his preferences and past experiences.

What isn't biased are the individual tests and side by side comparisions of the Olympus models vs. other models. The tests speak for themselves, they just say something different to everyone that reads them. To myself and those like me, the tests of the 5050 stated that the drawbacks of the camera were not much if any worse than most of it's competition. While the advantages (color reproduction, versitility of manual options, battery life, ect...) were far better than any of the other companies products. And it was several hundred dollars cheaper to boot!

Now, for whatever reasons, Phil felt that the drawbacks weighed heavier than the advantages in this particular case. And, the brand name written on the case may have factored into it. But, reguardless, the last 2 paragraphs of his 20 page reviews should not the basis for your decision, or your ego. Let those things ride on the facts, not the opinions.
cxy02 said:
Denis K said:
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
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
New and learning while having a GREAT time!

 
I am sorry cxy02...I thought that your comments were a direct responce to mine...

I think I need to get my eyes checked!!!!!!

:-)

--
New and learning while having a GREAT time!

 
Would you even consider a camera that got a "5" for image quality but made up for it with perfect "10"s in the other categories?

Sometimes the whole is only as strong as the weakest link in the chain. One weak link is enough to ruin the whole thing.

Personally I took issue with the "highly recommended" on the G3 due to the horribly flawed (partially blocked) viewfinder. To me that was an inexcusable design blunder. Blatant errors like that would immediately remove any model from contention for receiving my highest recommendation.
cxy02 said:
Denis K said:
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
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
cxy02 said:
Denis K said:
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
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I agree with the unfairness with the score of the 5050 in some ways,BUT Phil was reviewing this camera with its default settings,and we all know whats happened with the good old sharpening algorthmns at 0 dont we,that is why he has given it an 8 for image quality,if the sharpening algorthmns were set lower,less noise and Phil would have given the 5050 an 8.5 to a 9,WOULD NT YOU PHIL!!!!!!!!

Russell Butterfield

http://www.digi-darkroom.com
 
As a novice, I went to the c5050 last year after "checking" those cameras myself at the stores that "fit" my preferences! I have to admit that Phil's recommendation was really heavy on my minds though !

Phil is human as all of us. Phil has a right to be bias one way or the others. Phil did the works for free to all of us as well !! I always enjoy this forum in comparison with others to say the least ! :o))

Thanks all,

Harry
cxy02 said:
Denis K said:
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
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
No problem Jason. we learn things throuhg arguement. and thanks for your reply no matter mine was response to you or not.
you have a great time too.
Jason Groves said:
I am sorry cxy02...I thought that your comments were a direct
responce to mine...

I think I need to get my eyes checked!!!!!!

:-)

--
New and learning while having a GREAT time!

Click to expand...
 
Hi Russell:

Thanks for your reply, even with the fact that image quality was scored 8, it's total score still higher than at least other 3 high recommended cameras. so that's the point why it was unfair.
chao
Russell Butterfield said:
I agree with the unfairness with the score of the 5050 in some
ways,BUT Phil was reviewing this camera with its default
settings,and we all know whats happened with the good old
sharpening algorthmns at 0 dont we,that is why he has given it an 8
for image quality,if the sharpening algorthmns were set lower,less
noise and Phil would have given the 5050 an 8.5 to a 9,WOULD NT YOU
PHIL!!!!!!!!

Russell Butterfield

http://www.digi-darkroom.com
Click to expand...
 
Yes, I agree with you. I am not trying to blame anyone here. I personally like to read his review too and it has the great impact on my choice.

I agree every one has their right to be bias.but as a reviewer, your opion influence others. you'd better not to be bias. that's something different.
that will have a bad influece to market and products.
Chao
harrynguyen said:
Phil is human as all of us. Phil has a right to be bias one way or
the others. Phil did the works for free to all of us as well !! I
always enjoy this forum in comparison with others to say the least
! :o))

Thanks all,

Harry
cxy02 said:
Denis K said:
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
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Exactly the point! LAST TEN REVIEWS!!! Wish to write THIS off as a coincidence, Phill?
Philly said:
Phil Askey said:
When I post an 'average' review of any camera I get the same
response from the relevant forum... Apparently I am anti-Nikon,
anti-Canon, anti-Olympus, anti-Minolta, anti-Sony etc. etc.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
When the 10D came out and everyone started complaining about their focus problems Phil added a new test to his review trying, in the most scientific way I've seen so far, to test whether there was a problem with HIS camera, as it was the only one he had. He did the test, stated his results, and low and behold there wasn't a thing wrong with the focus. After months of excessive posts on this issue (can't people start a forum on Canon focusing problems and keep it there instead of creating a 100 new versions a day?) and several polls, the majority of people have no problems with their 10Ds, but those who do are very vocal and those who don't only stop in to say "no problems here". You mean Phil didn't create a biased test? Of course not. The truth is Canon makes great cameras. When the G3 came out it was obvious to me in his conclusions that it had some problems the G2 didn't, and every review I read agreed with his G2 and G3 conclusions. It's not Phil's fault Olympus doesn't like to send him cameras to review and it's not his fault that Canon makes a quality product. His reviews, quantity for each manufacturer or recommendation level, are not based on brand loyalty unless Canon is paying every reviewer, web and private, to push their product.

The reason every other forum has this conspiracy theory and Canon forum doesn't is because the popularity and quality of Canon attracts a lot of attention, and apparently there are people who can't handle the thought that their brand isn't the best....we shouldn't talk about brands, but instead about each camera individually.

With any human opinion, keeping all bias out is impossible, but that's why I was always told to know your sources -- a paper on the untruth of evolution takes on a whole new meaning when you realize an orthodox catholic wrote it. But, by creating so many standard tests Phil has filtered out as much of whatever bias he may have as he can. Maybe his conclusions are biased because of a history of bad Olympus cameras and history of good Canon cameras......wouldn't you be a bit biased if every Chevy you ever had was a cheap piece of junk and spend the first year in the shop? Or it just wasn't nearly as good as your friends' equivalent Fords and GMCs. This isn't a computer writing the reviews, but it is someone basing his opinions on objective fact.

Matt
 
well, my suspicion is goes a little bit further that that, Matt, sorry to be a pessimistic here! We're talking a vibrant fast moving consumer goods here and suddle (or not as suddle anymore) promotion techniques. It was noted above, TEN LATEST reviews for Canon by Phil are all "Highly Recommened" no matter focus problems or no, or if a clunky canon just showes its own lens into the viefinder (!!!) ( I wonder what kind of bashing a Nikon or an OLy would get from him for that!, but yet still Highly Recommended).

So my "hi" recommendation to Phil is to come out clean and put Canon labels everywhere on his site so we all know what kind of beast we're looking at here, and what to expect.

Evrything is relative, so IMHO imaging-resource.com is a much more reliable, UNBIASED = PRIOFESSIONAL source; at least THAT guy is not trying to steer your decisionmaking in any direction, just giving you his findings and allows to compare cams with test shots side by side (try comparometer--you'll see).

If we were all to review the reviewers I would personally downgrade Askey's reviews waay down for a strong bias towards Canon, period. And you all decide for yourselves please.

As to 10D, sorry mate, but as to many professionals here and there its a bit of an old news (add focusing problems too); FujiFinepx S2 beats the hell out of it in every way.
howyroark said:
When the 10D came out and everyone started complaining about their
focus problems Phil added a new test to his review trying, in the
most scientific way I've seen so far, to test whether there was a
problem with HIS camera, as it was the only one he had. He did the
test, stated his results, and low and behold there wasn't a thing
wrong with the focus. After months of excessive posts on this
issue (can't people start a forum on Canon focusing problems and
keep it there instead of creating a 100 new versions a day?) and
several polls, the majority of people have no problems with their
10Ds, but those who do are very vocal and those who don't only stop
in to say "no problems here". You mean Phil didn't create a biased
test? Of course not. The truth is Canon makes great cameras.
When the G3 came out it was obvious to me in his conclusions that
it had some problems the G2 didn't, and every review I read agreed
with his G2 and G3 conclusions. It's not Phil's fault Olympus
doesn't like to send him cameras to review and it's not his fault
that Canon makes a quality product. His reviews, quantity for each
manufacturer or recommendation level, are not based on brand
loyalty unless Canon is paying every reviewer, web and private, to
push their product.
The reason every other forum has this conspiracy theory and Canon
forum doesn't is because the popularity and quality of Canon
attracts a lot of attention, and apparently there are people who
can't handle the thought that their brand isn't the best....we
shouldn't talk about brands, but instead about each camera
individually.
With any human opinion, keeping all bias out is impossible, but
that's why I was always told to know your sources -- a paper on the
untruth of evolution takes on a whole new meaning when you realize
an orthodox catholic wrote it. But, by creating so many standard
tests Phil has filtered out as much of whatever bias he may have as
he can. Maybe his conclusions are biased because of a history of
bad Olympus cameras and history of good Canon cameras......wouldn't
you be a bit biased if every Chevy you ever had was a cheap piece
of junk and spend the first year in the shop? Or it just wasn't
nearly as good as your friends' equivalent Fords and GMCs. This
isn't a computer writing the reviews, but it is someone basing his
opinions on objective fact.

Matt
Click to expand...
 
Denis K said:
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.
Click to expand...
HA!

Tell me how a camera with no manual white balance, no manual focus, no hot shoe, and slow write performance is "almost pro" in its feature set. But the most damning failure is in image quality. Despite the 5mp sensor, the C-50 camera is a rank P&S for moms and pops, not even a "prosumer" camera.

Perhaps the mirror will show you the true face of bias.

Stanley
 
Stanley Allen said:
Denis K said:
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.
Click to expand...
HA!

Tell me how a camera with no manual white balance, no manual focus,
no hot shoe, and slow write performance is "almost pro" in its
feature set. But the most damning failure is in image quality.
Despite the 5mp sensor, the C-50 camera is a rank P&S for moms and
pops, not even a "prosumer" camera.

Perhaps the mirror will show you the true face of bias.

Stanley
Click to expand...
 
Stanley,

I looked at the true face of bias and it was yours. I have seen beautiful photos taken with the C50 on this forum and others. This camera is a sub-compact 5mp digicam with almost a pro-set of features. Denis said with "Almost A Pro-Set Of Features". It also has great manual control for such a small camera, it is missing some features, but for the people buying the C50, it is not a problem. It has a wonderful AI P&S mode for people who cannot read well. Try it some time.
Stanley Allen said:
Denis K said:
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.
Click to expand...
HA!

Tell me how a camera with no manual white balance, no manual focus,
no hot shoe, and slow write performance is "almost pro" in its
feature set. But the most damning failure is in image quality.
Despite the 5mp sensor, the C-50 camera is a rank P&S for moms and
pops, not even a "prosumer" camera.

Perhaps the mirror will show you the true face of bias.

Stanley
Click to expand...
--
C700uz, E100rs, Stylus 300
http://www.pbase.com/gene
Life is just a stage and we all have enough pictures to proof it!
 
HA! is exacty correct, Stan: help me understand how a 4mp cam with crappy glass, no manual focus, AF assist that is not working because its allignment is out kilter, a confusing "reversed" zoom lever, short battery life gets a "Highly Recommneded" being about $100 heavier than superior by all counts and more feature rich subcompacts by OLY, Pentax, Minolta, Nikon and Sony???

I am not even talking about complicated things like hot shoe, pixel mapping, etc etc.

Fairness is like pregnancy, its either "happening" or not.
Stanley Allen said:
Denis K said:
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.
Click to expand...
HA!

Tell me how a camera with no manual white balance, no manual focus,
no hot shoe, and slow write performance is "almost pro" in its
feature set. But the most damning failure is in image quality.
Despite the 5mp sensor, the C-50 camera is a rank P&S for moms and
pops, not even a "prosumer" camera.

Perhaps the mirror will show you the true face of bias.

Stanley
Click to expand...
 
Denis K said:
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
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top