You got it ALL wrong - Chasseur d'Images

Started Dec 23, 2007 | Discussions
thomas goseberg Senior Member • Posts: 1,080
You got it ALL wrong - Chasseur d'Images

Having read again through these threads, I found you got it all wrong, sorry.

Chasseur d'Images has published an excellent report about the Canon camera (5 stars, highest rating, no allegation to AF issues).

It's NOT about that they publish a bad review and Canon withdraws their ads.

It's rather it seems Canon lied to CI who in turn published wrong information, concerning the recall:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=26142363

I wonder how this goes on, CI certainly has enough advertising to survive without Canon...

-- hide signature --

KM 5 D + some fine lenses

LeRentier
LeRentier Forum Pro • Posts: 13,622
Re: You got it ALL wrong - Chasseur d'Images

It is finally dawning on a few people here and there that Canon's local management telling deliberate lies to the press is not good for their reputation.

Trying to punish that same press for talking by taking their advertisements to other press organs makes their case just worse.

CI can live without Canon advertisement and I bet that Canon's competitors in France are laughing their heads off.

René Schuster Forum Pro • Posts: 14,180
Thomas,

thomas goseberg wrote:

Having read again through these threads, I found you got it all
wrong, sorry.
Chasseur d'Images has published an excellent report about the Canon
camera (5 stars, highest rating, no allegation to AF issues).
It's NOT about that they publish a bad review and Canon withdraws
their ads.
It's rather it seems Canon lied to CI who in turn published wrong
information, concerning the recall:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=26142363
I wonder how this goes on, CI certainly has enough advertising to
survive without Canon...

thanks, very interesting post! Makes things look different!

Canon withdrawing their ads because CI published that Canon lied to them, not because CI gave the camera a bad test result!

I think you should repeat your post in this other thread, same wording, same headline, so they hopefully get it. Seems they all overlook your post there, but just read the OP and write a reply.

René

roger lafrite New Member • Posts: 13
the chasseur d'image problem

They did't detect the AF and give five stars at the test

it is obvious that their camera have a problem here

During months they contest on their site photim and sacked many MkIII owners like pixel Z

and after the rob galbraith fix message on his site we are end october !!!! we see that on the front page of photim (he has been removed note the courage !!)
they says they have seen no problem

which is the goal of hunter in this business ?

t is just about a smoke screen intended has to go up their credibility near the public and this on the back of somebody

in french we says: to remake the cherry on the back of somebody (se réfaire la cérise sur le dos de quelqu'un)

very ashamed chasseur d'image

Geir Ove Veteran Member • Posts: 3,098
Not the first time Canon is arrogant

Hello,

My father and I have s 10 page long story on all the lies and trouble we got into trying to fix the focus problems of the Canon 70-300 DO lens:

Rumour has it that because of the Diffractive Optiocs (DO) this lens could not was not "sharp": That was dead wrong, but theses lenses (we tried 7 of them from different series !!!) indeed had a focus problem. But Canon Norway would not admit to anything, instead they where dragging their feets for weeks and feeding us with all kinds of b*llsh*t.

There is a guy in England (can' remember his name) that had same problem and he concluded that Status Quo is the same for Canon Europe and it goes higher up...

I am an Canon 20D owner, but have lostt all faith and respect for Canon !

Geir Ove

-- hide signature --
roger lafrite New Member • Posts: 13
LeRentier méthod (discover of a lier)

here he says: no problem will discover during test

obviously he lies

but it is not his goal by this thread

his words on photim

"Le fil dans dpreview n'avait pas d'autre but que d'accélérer la promotion internationale du fabuleux responsable marketing de Canon France car il est possible que des gens de Canon Japon regardent eux-mêmes les forums ou ça cause en anglais."

He admit his shameful method on photim

but he note

"Quand je fais l'addition des commentaires des uns et des autres, ici et ailleurs, j'en retire l'impression que tous les boitiers du MkIII ne sont pas concernés et qu'un certain nombre fonctionnerait correctement."

and oseydoux (a photim poster) note

"Il y a quand même un truc que je n'ai pas compris de la part de CI...
Pourquoi n'ont-ils pas testé un de ces fichus MKIII qui posaient problèmes ?
Si la rédac pouvait m'éclairer sur ce point..."

But chasseur d'image have tested one oseydoux !!!!! they have tested a bad copy !!! and they didn't discover that, CAN THEY ADMIT THAT ?

today chasseur d'images and his fans like LeRentier and meunier are just making an worldwide communication for making an smokescreen on this chasseur d'image test.

During months they bashed every one who says he has problem on his camera on their site (perhaps LeRentier has selective memory)

chasseur d'image reaction is too late and it comes after the rob galbraith pit the article on the MkIII fix.

LeRentier
LeRentier Forum Pro • Posts: 13,622
how to promote people

I believe this manager needs visibility, as much as possible.

If what he does and how he behaves matches Canon's likes, so be it but, if he does not and creates wrong impressions, too bad for him.

roger lafrite New Member • Posts: 13
Re: how to promote people

LeRentier wrote:

I believe this manager needs visibility, as much as possible.
If what he does and how he behaves matches Canon's likes, so be it
but, if he does not and creates wrong impressions, too bad for him.

this operation is just an smokescreen about the chasseur d'images tests

and what do you think about them (the chasseur d'image pages tests are here)

do you think that ronan loaec has made a good job when he not detect that the camea fails at 25 meters ? obviously not

and HERE YOU LIES when you write that no problem will de detect during test.

and you know that GMC himself have bashed some markIII users and they said in their magazine that it as no problem it is just some users who dont have the F1 licence

they reacted after rob galbraith has put the MKIII fix on its website

Now they want a share of glory and want to be the white knight that they have never been and on the back of someone.

Chasseur LIES and you LIES

note

On photim many users test their camera fix on TGV (high speed train) and find that canon france is doing a good job and that's the most important thing.

David Gay Regular Member • Posts: 178
Re: the chasseur d'image problem

roger lafrite wrote:

and after the rob galbraith fix message on his site we are end
october !!!! we see that on the front page of photim (he has been
removed note the courage !!)
they says they have seen no problem

which is the goal of hunter in this business ?

t is just about a smoke screen intended has to go up their
credibility near the public and this on the back of somebody

You're seriously working on lowering your own credibility by failing to translate the sentences that follow the part outlined in red. The whole thing actually reads:

"As for ourselves, we haven't noticed any problem with the 1DMkIII, and the users we know are more than happy (if you own a 1DMkIII that is suffering this problem, please contact us, we'd like to test your camera). This does not mean that their camera does not have a defect in a configuration that they haven't yet tried (the problem seems to appear in very bright light and warm temperatures, in AI-Servo only), nor that the problem affects all cameras in the series."

Or in other words, you may have a point, but the way you're making it weakens it... You sound like someone out on a vendetta against Chasseur d'Images, without telling us why (e.g. your scanned extracts from Chasseur d'Images are clearly no sufficient evidence of any problem - would the results be the same if they had run each test five times?)

For that matter, the typical test procedures one sees (in tests, or postings on various forums) are clearly not statiscally sufficient for most of the conclusions drawn from them... Not enough repeatability or repeated measurements.

David Gay

J A K Forum Pro • Posts: 15,833
To all, is "LeRentier" affiliated with the magazine ...

and/or the magazine's forum (if there is such a thing)?

Is "photim" a forum? Is "photim" (assuming it is a forum) owned and operated by Chasseur d'Images?

You guys are having an argument in your second language and please don't take this the wrong way, but it's hard to figure what is going on for dummies like me. So please allow me to inject a "time out" and try to get a sense of what is actually under discussion; thanks for this opportunity. I'm slow but with a little help from everybody I'm sure I'll begin to understand what is going on.

Is part of the issue under discussion that the magazine incorrectly reported their own results (results that were published in the review but not interpreted correctly in the same review? Does everybody agree with what I think I'm reading?

Is part of the issue under discussion, assuming there was a mistake on the part ofChasseur d'Images, that they now are trying to cover up their mistake (in the initial 1DmkIII review) by diverting attention to Canon's recent removal of adds in response to an article (that came after the initial 1DmkIII review) which identifies a world wide problem with the camera?

Is part of the issue under discussion that the magazine's forum, specifically the managers running the forum shouted down photographers that reported problems with the 1DmkIII?

Is part of the issue under discussion ... I completely forgot what I was going to ask in this next one (hopefully it will come back to me). Hey, I warned you I was a dummy, didn't I?

Thanks for any help you can provide! Before you guys get "too" mad at each other just remember somebody else might be listening to the discussion.
http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia/image/61842440/original

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian, Pbase Supporter

SEARCHING FOR A BETTER SELF PORTRAIT

J A K Forum Pro • Posts: 15,833
David, would you please help me out here.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=26146618

Thanks, I appreciate any help you can provide.

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian, Pbase Supporter

SEARCHING FOR A BETTER SELF PORTRAIT

roger lafrite New Member • Posts: 13
david

they tested a bad copy

and they didn't detect it !!!

here is the problem

If you think that a camera whose last sharp image is at 25 meters, and he made it worse than the MkII when he is supposed to do better you make a great mistake

this month the e3 olympus has the last sharp shoot at 3 meters for 100km/h (a big gap if you compare to the MKIII)

Above it is their AF tests do you really think it has no problem ?

They do nothing during month and its NOTHING

Now they want a share of the glory of rob galbraith but when rob galbraith publish the fix it has noting about the MKIII on photim.

Today they play the indignant and try just a publicity stunt at little cost

it is just a shame.

Ransom Veteran Member • Posts: 3,067
Re: how "not" to promote people

roger lafrite wrote:

Chasseur LIES and you LIES

Sober up dude.. Canon is KING! Reviewers never tell truths, and you are one rude son of a bitch..!

-- hide signature --

Cheers! Robert..

Poss
Poss Contributing Member • Posts: 578
C'mon David...

There a few things funnier than two Frenchmen bashing each-other in English, but not too many...

Joke aside, I too subscribe to CI (your translation of the scanned text is spot-on BTW) and Chasseur's beef with Canon appears to be the latter's attitude and actions leading to the official recall. CI was made to sign a NDA only hours before the official announcement, following a history of strong denial of any issues by Canon.
That about sums it up...
Cheers!
--
Bogdan

Life is beautiful

 Poss's gear list:Poss's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 Canon EOS 5D Mark II Nikon D700 Nikon D3S Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM +10 more
LeRentier
LeRentier Forum Pro • Posts: 13,622
Re: To all, is "LeRentier" affiliated with the magazine ...

Just to make my position clear, I am a retired IT professional and a fairly regular reader of that magazine.

Photim is the forum on which numerous people exchange ideas, tips, share pictures, etc. and that forum is hosted by the magazine.
My only point is the undue pressure by Canon on the magazine.
It is very bad crisis management and hurts their reputation.

I also believe that a manager who decides to sort of blackmail a magazine because his lies are exposed, is a jerk.

ps

I have no idea who this foul mouthed, vociferous Roger Lafrite is and what bone he has to pick with whom.

J A K Forum Pro • Posts: 15,833
Re: To all, is "LeRentier" affiliated with the magazine ...

Thanks for your reply.

LeRentier wrote:

Just to make my position clear, I am a retired IT professional and a
fairly regular reader of that magazine.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Photim is the forum on which numerous people exchange ideas, tips,
share pictures, etc. and that forum is hosted by the magazine.

Thanks again, that's what I thought but wasn't sure.

My only point is the undue pressure by Canon on the magazine.
It is very bad crisis management and hurts their reputation.
I also believe that a manager who decides to sort of blackmail a
magazine because his lies are exposed, is a jerk.

Yes, I have to agree 100 percent with your point. That said, blackmail or not, IMO Canon has every right to withdraw their advertising (i.e everybody has the right to be stupid at their own risk). Of course the obligation of the magazine is the report the truth to the best of their ability. Sometimes a publisher's integrity will cost from the standpoint advertising revenue; this is simply the cost of doing business properly.

ps
I have no idea who this foul mouthed, vociferous Roger Lafrite is and
what bone he has to pick with whom.

I'm not sure if my interpretation is entirely correct so please, correct me if I'm wrong (I'd really appreciate it). I'm getting the impression that Roger Lafrite is trying to identify three jerks. Jerk-1: Canon France for the implied blackmail (both of you seem to agree on this point, right?). Jerk-2, the magazine for not interpreting and reporting their own test results correctly in the first place (I'm assuming Roger's test data above was pulled from the actual 1DmkIII review?). Jerk-3, the magazine's forum manager(s) for shouting down those that reported problems with the 1DmkIII and depicting them as whiners. Sounds like you guys are not in complete agreement regarding the magazine's shortcomings (2 and 3), am I correct?

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian, Pbase Supporter

SEARCHING FOR A BETTER SELF PORTRAIT

LeRentier
LeRentier Forum Pro • Posts: 13,622
Re: To all, is "LeRentier" affiliated with the magazine ...

The magazine started a first hands on report on a pre-series body and noticed it still had a few shortcomings in the focusing area but otherwise was magnificient.

The test body they were handed later either was perfect or the testers did not notice the glitch, maybe because they did not use conditions which were extreme enough or not with the lens that could have revealed the problems.

The magazine's specialists showed doubt when some people started to complain about the camera because they felt they had not experienced anything fishy themselves.

I suspect the magazine no longer had a MkIII body available when it became obvious that just too many people were reporting difficulties so the magazine turned to Canon for clarification.

Had Canon been on the level there would not have been any issue because the magazine probably would have been more than willing to reflect Canon's own findings and plans to resolve the issue.

No doubt the magazine would have been very happy to relay whatever information Canon would have liked it to in order to calm the storm.

It looks like Canon did everything the wrong way and, in a way, added insult to injury.

If Lafrite's opinion is that the magazine should have done better than maybe he is in a position to create new test protocols which are better adapted to the ever more complex cameras and lenses and thus has a fantastic business opportunity.

roger lafrite New Member • Posts: 13
Re: To all, is

LeRentier wrote:

If Lafrite's opinion is that the magazine should have done better
than maybe he is in a position to create new test protocols which are
better adapted to the ever more complex cameras and lenses and thus
has a fantastic business opportunity.

The VELOCITY TEST engines exist and it uses by la fnac and chasseur by example

Perharps you are playing the idiot ?

Here I put the pictures of their test showing that chasseur have tested a bad copy !!!!

to be clear when a camera take it last sharp image a 25 meters when the previous model the mark II take his last sharp image at 13 meters it has obviously a problem

if you think it's not you LIES

when chasseur give five stars at this camera and write they didn't have seen a camera with AF problem they LIES

Now if you have an explanation to explain how a markIII fail at 25 meters and a e3 olympus at only 3 meters I am interested in your explanation.

note in photim the saff of chasseur prefer put me out of the forum Rather than answer me.

Now can you ask this question on photim and ask for an answer ? If you do it thank you in advance. I am very interested in the resplies of ronan loaec.

Digitalux Contributing Member • Posts: 821
Re: C'mon David...

To add my .02 to your comment, the NDA they had to sign would allow them to access the letter Canon sent to their dealers or local branches (don't remember) ... which was already on the net for some time.

The fact CHasseur d'Images had to sign a NDA for documents already made public also triggered some anger on their side.

Best regards and happy x-mas to all members of the forum,

Derek

Poss wrote:

There a few things funnier than two Frenchmen bashing each-other in
English, but not too many...
Joke aside, I too subscribe to CI (your translation of the scanned
text is spot-on BTW) and Chasseur's beef with Canon appears to be the
latter's attitude and actions leading to the official recall. CI was
made to sign a NDA only hours before the official announcement,
following a history of strong denial of any issues by Canon.
That about sums it up...
Cheers!
--
Bogdan

Life is beautiful

roger lafrite New Member • Posts: 13
6 days and no reply by le rentier

perhaps he has noting to declare and he has seen nothing like his friend the worst tester ronan loaec ?

roger lafrite wrote:

LeRentier wrote:

If Lafrite's opinion is that the magazine should have done better
than maybe he is in a position to create new test protocols which are
better adapted to the ever more complex cameras and lenses and thus
has a fantastic business opportunity.

The VELOCITY TEST engines exist and it uses by la fnac and chasseur
by example

Perharps you are playing the idiot ?

Here I put the pictures of their test showing that chasseur have
tested a bad copy !!!!

to be clear when a camera take it last sharp image a 25 meters when
the previous model the mark II take his last sharp image at 13 meters
it has obviously a problem

if you think it's not you LIES
when chasseur give five stars at this camera and write they didn't
have seen a camera with AF problem they LIES

Now if you have an explanation to explain how a markIII fail at 25
meters and a e3 olympus at only 3 meters I am interested in your
explanation.

note in photim the saff of chasseur prefer put me out of the forum
Rather than answer me.

Now can you ask this question on photim and ask for an answer ? If
you do it thank you in advance. I am very interested in the resplies
of ronan loaec.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads