G6 Initial Annoyances...

[ralph m]

"Joy in Mudville" The G series lives on. And if you want a black one ... Past history says..wait till the G7 arrives. No problem.

By the way, I am not sure I agree that there is a international conspriacy at work here to steal our money or our souls. Like I said before.. You don't have to buy it if you don't want to.

Regards.
--
Ralph M
FCAS Member(77)
http://www.pbase.com/rmcmillan

 

[wy2lam]

Great. I finally understand your position.

It is just how the market works - create a product, sell a product, feedback, create another product, etc.

The bottom line is, if nobody buys the G6, then it'll prove you right and I'm sure they'll improve in the next product cycle. If G6 sells like hotcakes, then Canon is doing something right.

Technical feasibility is just ONE factor how products is designed.
Face it - it is called market segmentation. It is not a new
practice and Canon is not the only company who does it.

Whatever the feature list is, there are still people who always
want more. You'll have to compare your products and those of your
competitors, then put the limit SOMEWHERE to differentiate between
your products.

I have no problem with this. But it's one thing to say, "We offers
products A, B, and C" and quote another to only show product see,
wait for everyone to buy it, and then release A and B which many
people would have preferred all along.

You want bounce flash? Live blownout warning? 20 hour battery
life? An OVF that has low parallax and still does not see the lens
barrel? Then pay more.

I'll gladly pay more for what I want.

A company is a company and Canon is not a charity organization -
profit maximization still rules all companies. A company who does
everything that everyone tells it to, goes belly up quickly.

As you have probably surmised by now, I am not a big fan of
unbridled big business nor the theory that "the market always knows
best."

Increasing levels of greed are having counterproductive results, as
we see when company executives make poor decisions seeking short
term gains that are increasingly resulting in long term disaster
for their company, their employees, and their stockholders, long
after the initial harm to consumers and society.

I feel that moderation is important, and that you need balance in
everything. The unbridled quest for maximizing short term profits
at all costs is not a viable long term strategy - in either a
company, or in a local or national economy.

 

[Jim]

Technical feasibility is just ONE factor how products is designed.
Face it - it is called market segmentation. It is not a new
practice and Canon is not the only company who does it.

Whatever the feature list is, there are still people who always
want more. You'll have to compare your products and those of your
competitors, then put the limit SOMEWHERE to differentiate between
your products.

Absolutely true. (Christ, the freakin' whining is tiresome.)

You want bounce flash? Live blownout warning? 20 hour battery
life? An OVF that has low parallax and still does not see the lens
barrel? Then pay more.

Exactly. The G6 is a nice mid-range prosumer camera that many will purchase for good reason.

A company is a company and Canon is not a charity organization -
profit maximization still rules all companies. A company who does
everything that everyone tells it to, goes belly up quickly.

Indeed. Your points are well taken. If one steps back and looks at Canon, their products are excellent in each category from compact to full DSLRs. Few companies can say the same on the scale that Canon has achieved.

Jim

 

[Lucem]

As I said.
How can the camera can chose if the lightmeter won't work under low light?

Even if you want to do it through EV compensation, it won't work since EV compensation is based in the lightmeter.

What they could have done is to base exposure in histogram reading when is too dark, but its just my speculation, since I' dont know the technical hurdles for such approach, but sound reasonable.

 

[soah]

"How about apples to apples?

G3 vs. G5
Which looked better?"

• I actually like the G3 if it wasn't for the gray grip section. Hence my preference for the G6 colour-scheme...

"> Sure, its'a matter of taste. But current trends dictate that silver

is no longer "retro cool" and black remains the color that signals
"professional" and "high end"."

Current tastes in digital cameras are for silver. That is why silver is the most popular colour. Now whether or not consumers dictate or manufacturers dictate by not giving consumers a choice is another issue. Trend wise silver is it right now or you wouldn't have anything to complain about

"> The G-series isn't marketed at people who favor style over

substance. There are far more attractive and fashionable cameras
out there. The G-series is a serious tool, aimed at people who
consider themselves serious photographers. "

then colour shouldn't be such a huge factor no? If the camera is a good camera it wouldn't matter

"Huh? Since when do pros "baby" their cameras? Why do you think real

pro cameras have solid magnesium housings with tough, baked-on
finishes and o-ring seals to keep out dust and water?"

um...that's sort of my point...

when's the last time people did that with P&Ss? I don't think I'd be too wrong in inferring that a professional who relies on his thousands of dollars camera for a living would be more careful and care for it more than a typical consumer looking for a 300 dollar camera for vacation photos. Who would go to more lengths to prevent scratches or letting it lie around without a case/bag? Heck many women throw their cameras in a handbag with their keys and makeup kits.

 

[Mike Hunt]

2) Silver body - in definace of the masses clamoring for black
bodies - no doubt in preparation of a future model "special
edition" release with insignificant improvements but a black "pro"
body.

A lot of people prefer the silver too. Anyway it's Canon's right
to do this, it's their product.

Most people prefer the black, and the camera's competitors at this
level are all black: Nikon, Olympus, Nikon, Minolta... All pro
cameras are black.

Define "Most".

Only guessing here, but I strongly suspect that 60% or more prospective buyers of a professional or semi-professional camera would say that it looks better in black than silver. Yes, I'm just talking out of my a* . You want to conduct a formal, large-scale, scientific, double-blinded survey and subject it to peer review?

I think there's a difference between smart and sleazy. Smart is
designing and engineering a brilliant product that proves highly
successful and appealing.

And expensive. Nothing in this world is free, even if you didn't
pay for it.

Some companies innovate, and some companies manipulate.

Apple innovates. Microsoft manipulates.

Microsoft is more profitable. Apple is more admirable.

Sleazy is using deception to fool people
into buying things they would not otherwise have bought.

We seem to have an increasing scarcity of the former combined with
an overabundance of the latter...

The amount of technical brilliance you saw in the past few years
attributed to the fact that digicams were still maturing. Right
now we're seeing more evolutionary changes than revolutionary
changes. It doesn't mean the engineers are not working hard
anymore.

True. But when it becomes harder to push the envelopw, I would hope Canon would address some of the many "do-able" things we've been requesting before resorting to deceptive and manipulative marketing tactics to push us to be stuff we wouldn't otherwise want.

That's just it. These companies don't answer or comment on
anything. They don't think we deserve any explanations. Other
cameras have removed these limitations. It is a simple matter of
adding more buffer memory. This would add a little cost to the
camera, thereby narrowing their profit margins a tiny bit that they
are not willing to give up.

I'm sure you have done the calculations to know what amounts to
your "tiny bit". Wait...maybe it's just a guess.

It's a simple matter of adding a little memory chip and/or processor to process the video as fast as the memory card can store it.

If this is so difficult or expensive, how come Olympus, Sony, and others seem to have miraculously overcome this "huge" challenge?

Same happens with film, which is where the term "reciprocity
failure" derives from. But pro cameras don't have this limitation,
and neither do other models at this level from Nikon, Olympus, etc.
Canon underestimates the intelligence of the photographer. At
least, there should be an override setting in the menus.

And besides, if reciprocity is the issue, then why do they allow
long shutter speeds in Tv mode? If this were really the issue, long
exposures would only be allowed in Manual mode.

The reason is probably that Canon think's we're too stupid to
notice when the shutter speed has been slowed down to levels that
demand a tripod.

Finally, something we agree on - the shutter speed is something
REALLY arbitrary, and can be removed. The movie length limit as
well - if they don't care about user experiences with choppy
recordings when the buffer goes full.

The other guys seem to have enough processing power and buffer memory to accomplish this without choppiness... and they are still competing at this price point.

But I disagree with the movement of the mode dial and other buttons
on the G6. I can hold and operate the G3 with one hand. I cannot do
the same with the Pro1 because 1) it's too heavy, and 2) it's
difficult to impossible to operate many controls without using two
hands. If I wanted a camera that required two-handed operation, I'd
get an SLR.

Again, it is just your personal preference. A lot of people prefer
to operate their cameras with two hands, even if they can do it
with one.

The difference is that the G3 can be operated with one OR two hands - so the user has a choice. Not so with the Pro1.

6) Stll only 2 Custom modes - the most powerful and most often
verlooked tool over working around poor AF performance and shutter
lag. They should expand to 4 or more, as Olympus has.

Agree, or at least 3 total. Can't see why they wouldn't. Good point.

This probably falls into the "too obscure" area. Most people don't
even know the value of this feature and Canon doesn't properly
promote it, hoping to avoid admitting just how useless their AF
system is in low light or with moving subjects.

Let's say, if they add 5 more custom modes and increase the price
by $50, will you accept it?

How much memory do you think it takes to store a custom setting? Probably a few hundred bytes at most. Olympus and Nikon have more custom settings and they cost LESS.

If they had a G6, in black, and they eliminated the shutter speed limit, the movie clip limit, increased to 8 custom settings, preserved an ergonomic design and weight distribution to allow one-handed operation, and incorporated some sort of useful Sony-esque AF system, I'd pay $1000 for the camera.

This camera should have been out a year ago.

 

[Mike Hunt]

"Joy in Mudville" The G series lives on. And if you want a black
one ... Past history says..wait till the G7 arrives. No problem.

By the way, I am not sure I agree that there is a international
conspriacy at work here to steal our money or our souls. Like I
said before.. You don't have to buy it if you don't want to.

I don't... And I won't. :-D

 

[Mike Hunt]

As I said.
How can the camera can chose if the lightmeter won't work under low
light?

Even if you want to do it through EV compensation, it won't work
since EV compensation is based in the lightmeter.

Once again, if this is the issue, then why do they allow long exposures in Tv mode, rather than limiting them to Manual? Won't you have the same metering errors then?

Incidentally, this highlights an issue I haven't whined about enough: the inability to quickly adjust shutter speed from one end to the other because the camera controls are not responsie enough...

 

[Mike Hunt]

You said it yourself - even if you were right.

"The G-series isn't marketed at people who favor style over
substance". So why would you care about the colour? Black or
silver, it shouldn't matter to you, right?

I didn't say it doesn't matter to me. I said I don't favor style over substance (at least not when selecting a serious camera). I still CARE. And I still hate that Canon uses the black color to push subsequent camera models with few improvements, clearly demonstrating that they know black sells.

I know a lot of people who don't like their equipments to be
all-black and some of them are serious amateurs to say the least
(they make some bucks selling their pics). Your preference do not
represent everyone else's.

Not everyone's but most people, I think. Why are all pro cameras black?

Second, even if the colour choice is entirely driven by greed,
there is nothing wrong making another model in black IF you think
it is more valuable.

Then offer both colors at the same time and let me decide which one I want. But don't hold back the more popular color, forcing me to either wait 9 months for the color I want or buy now the one I don't like.

Imagine a car manufacturer releasing a popular car only in cheesy colors, saving the cool colors for the end of the year right before the following year's model comes out. Saavy marketing, but sleazy nonetheless.

If you see things around you the way you are seeing this issue,
you'll be very sad person, and dare I say not very suitable to live
in a capitalism-inspired market economy (UK, US, Germany, Canada,
etc)

So you're one of those "love it or leave it" type, I assume.

 

[ralph m]

my position is very simple.
1. Be happy that the G series is alive and well.
2. If you like it... and it fits your needs...buy it.
3. If you don't like it.. don't buy it.
4. Be satisfied with the choices you make.

I really think that Canon will sell a ton of these if the reports of better noise supression and new lens coatings cutting CA hold up. I may buy one myself as an old G3 customer with a lot of Canon stuff in my bag.

--
Ralph M
FCAS Member(77)
http://www.pbase.com/rmcmillan

 

[Mike Hunt]

G3 vs. G5
Which looked better?"

• I actually like the G3 if it wasn't for the gray grip section.

Hence my preference for the G6 colour-scheme...

"> Sure, its'a matter of taste. But current trends dictate that silver

is no longer "retro cool" and black remains the color that signals
"professional" and "high end"."

Current tastes in digital cameras are for silver.

Only on low- and mid-range models.

The $700+ models are mostly black, and all pro SLRs are black.

Here again, the 300D is silver, not because most people want it to be silver, but to differentiate it from pricier models.

"> The G-series isn't marketed at people who favor style over

substance. There are far more attractive and fashionable cameras
out there. The G-series is a serious tool, aimed at people who
consider themselves serious photographers. "

then colour shouldn't be such a huge factor no? If the camera is a
good camera it wouldn't matter

It most certainly DOES matter, even if I prioritize functionality over appearance.

"Huh? Since when do pros "baby" their cameras? Why do you think real

pro cameras have solid magnesium housings with tough, baked-on
finishes and o-ring seals to keep out dust and water?"

um...that's sort of my point...

No, you implied that silver was used on consumer models because consumers are rougher on their cameras than pros, silver is more resistant to abuse. I disagree on both points.

when's the last time people did that with P&Ss? I don't think I'd
be too wrong in inferring that a professional who relies on his
thousands of dollars camera for a living would be more careful and
care for it more than a typical consumer looking for a 300 dollar
camera for vacation photos.

Obviously you haven't seen professional photographers at work. Aside from maybe wedding and portrait pros, others are very rough with their equipment - particualrly photojournalists.

 

[Mike Hunt]

The only thing I found interesting was the claim of faster AF, which I don't believe for a minute. If true, though, this would be far more important than the 7mp sensor.

I don't knowck the G6 overall, I just think they should have let people know it was coming when the Pro1 was released.

my position is very simple.
1. Be happy that the G series is alive and well.
2. If you like it... and it fits your needs...buy it.
3. If you don't like it.. don't buy it.
4. Be satisfied with the choices you make.

I really think that Canon will sell a ton of these if the reports
of better noise supression and new lens coatings cutting CA hold
up. I may buy one myself as an old G3 customer with a lot of Canon
stuff in my bag.

--
Ralph M
FCAS Member(77)
http://www.pbase.com/rmcmillan

 

[Medic Laviña]

I don't knowck the G6 overall, I just think they should have let
people know it was coming when the Pro1 was released.

Any person with a little knowledge of marketing and sales won't do that. If you think an information could create a negative impact on your sales target, you won't reveal that to the public.
--
Medic

 

[Lucem]

As I said.
How can the camera can chose if the lightmeter won't work under low
light?

Even if you want to do it through EV compensation, it won't work
since EV compensation is based in the lightmeter.

Once again, if this is the issue, then why do they allow long
exposures in Tv mode, rather than limiting them to Manual? Won't
you have the same metering errors then?

I have said it millions of times to you.

I won't repeat it any more, use your brain or read my initial post regarding this issue.

Incidentally, this highlights an issue I haven't whined about
enough: the inability to quickly adjust shutter speed from one end
to the other because the camera controls are not responsie enough...

Yes, the main dial sometimes sucks, for the G3/G5.
But you are speculating here before the full reviews are up.

I hope the main dial was fixed, coz it means the Manual focus will be more usable as well

 

[wy2lam]

Most people prefer the black, and the camera's competitors at this
level are all black: Nikon, Olympus, Nikon, Minolta... All pro
cameras are black.

Define "Most".

Only guessing here, but I strongly suspect that 60% or more
prospective buyers of a professional or semi-professional camera
would say that it looks better in black than silver. Yes, I'm just
talking out of my a* . You want to conduct a formal, large-scale,
scientific, double-blinded survey and subject it to peer review?

That's sort of my point I don't conduct formal, large-scale, scientific market surveys. However, I'm sure Canon dedicates a department of resources to do it - and maybe, just maybe, they know that more people want silver than black.

I think there's a difference between smart and sleazy. Smart is
designing and engineering a brilliant product that proves highly
successful and appealing.

And expensive. Nothing in this world is free, even if you didn't
pay for it.

Some companies innovate, and some companies manipulate.

Apple innovates. Microsoft manipulates.

Microsoft is more profitable. Apple is more admirable.

And the scale is (from most desirable to least desirable)
1. A company which is both admirable and profitable
2. A company which is only profitable
3. A company which is only admirable
4. A company which is neither admirable nor profitable

Only a handful of companies can achieve #1, and Apple is one of them.
Microsoft falls into #2 which is not too bad.

However, given that all companies must obey the laws, if there's a conflict between being admirable and being profitable, profitable comes first, except that not being admirable will make you not profitable in a longer run, then you may want to be in #3 instead of #2.

It all depends on what a company has to do in order to survive.

The amount of technical brilliance you saw in the past few years
attributed to the fact that digicams were still maturing. Right
now we're seeing more evolutionary changes than revolutionary
changes. It doesn't mean the engineers are not working hard
anymore.

True. But when it becomes harder to push the envelopw, I would hope
Canon would address some of the many "do-able" things we've been
requesting before resorting to deceptive and manipulative marketing
tactics to push us to be stuff we wouldn't otherwise want.

All marketing tactisc are manipulative, or maybe "deceptive" in some's eyes - it tries to manipulate public perception. I have to emphasize - it is NOT WRONG as long as a "balance" is achieved: at what point are the manipulations considered "overdone"?

NO company can push a person to buy anything he doesn't want unless the customer decides that he actually wants it. Sure, some will regret the purchase after buying, but it is the buyer's fault not the seller's - he/she should havfe done enough research by himself before buying. It is not like the company keeps the specs all secret.

Just vote with your wallet and pick another brand, like how a market economy should work.

I'm sure you have done the calculations to know what amounts to
your "tiny bit". Wait...maybe it's just a guess.

It's a simple matter of adding a little memory chip and/or
processor to process the video as fast as the memory card can store
it.

If this is so difficult or expensive, how come Olympus, Sony, and
others seem to have miraculously overcome this "huge" challenge?

Read the reviews all over the Internet. How come the Canon cams consistently get good reviews and the same is not true for Olympus, Sony and others? Probably because:

1. They cut corners in some other areas in order to save cost.
2. They add the cost to the camera, you just don't notice it because of #1.

Again, it is just your personal preference. A lot of people prefer
to operate their cameras with two hands, even if they can do it
with one.

The difference is that the G3 can be operated with one OR two hands

• so the user has a choice. Not so with the Pro1.

Point taken.

However, don't you notice that the G6/Pro1 also give you a grip which makes it more difficult to shake the camera when you release the shutter? Weight is a good thing and a bad thing at the same time.

It is again, "balance". There is no perfect design. Decisions must be made in order to find a good compromise. Improve in one area, hurts another. It is the universal truth of all designs.

Let's say, if they add 5 more custom modes and increase the price
by $50, will you accept it?

How much memory do you think it takes to store a custom setting?
Probably a few hundred bytes at most. Olympus and Nikon have more
custom settings and they cost LESS.

Again, they cut cost in other areas. You'll find something that are on the Canons and not on Nikons and Olympi as well.

If they had a G6, in black, and they eliminated the shutter speed
limit, the movie clip limit, increased to 8 custom settings,
preserved an ergonomic design and weight distribution to allow
one-handed operation, and incorporated some sort of useful
Sony-esque AF system, I'd pay $1000 for the camera.

Write it down. I'm sure you'll find it somewhere after Photokina 2004, Canon or not.

This camera should have been out a year ago.

It all depends on availability of 7MP Sony sensors. Not all components in Canon cams are made by Canon.

Again, don't limit yourself to a single brand. You'll find what you want.

 

[wy2lam]

If you see things around you the way you are seeing this issue,
you'll be very sad person, and dare I say not very suitable to live
in a capitalism-inspired market economy (UK, US, Germany, Canada,
etc)

So you're one of those "love it or leave it" type, I assume.

You can say that.

Unless you work at Canon, you don't have much control of their products.

I just decide to go for a more practical route to solve a problem - voting with my wallet - instead of making complaints on a review board that weighs little if at all.

 

[Lucem]

I'm not talking about Epson cosina $3000 Digital range finder or Digilux 2 $2000.
My initial list of annoyances I'm sure won't go beyond the $100 more mark.
I challenge you to say otherwise.

 

[wy2lam]

G3 vs. G5
Which looked better?"

• I actually like the G3 if it wasn't for the gray grip section.

Hence my preference for the G6 colour-scheme...

"> Sure, its'a matter of taste. But current trends dictate that silver

is no longer "retro cool" and black remains the color that signals
"professional" and "high end"."

Current tastes in digital cameras are for silver.

Only on low- and mid-range models.

The $700+ models are mostly black, and all pro SLRs are black.

Here again, the 300D is silver, not because most people want it to
be silver, but to differentiate it from pricier models.

Okay. Let's assume you're right, that "black DOES look better than silver". So we've proven that it worths something.

As a result, making a camera black IS adding value to it. I fail to see why it cannot be something to differentiate products, i.e. Black-> more expensive, Silver-> less expensive, or Black-> special edition, Silver-> normal edition.

"Huh? Since when do pros "baby" their cameras? Why do you think real

pro cameras have solid magnesium housings with tough, baked-on
finishes and o-ring seals to keep out dust and water?"

um...that's sort of my point...

No, you implied that silver was used on consumer models because
consumers are rougher on their cameras than pros, silver is more
resistant to abuse. I disagree on both points.

when's the last time people did that with P&Ss? I don't think I'd
be too wrong in inferring that a professional who relies on his
thousands of dollars camera for a living would be more careful and
care for it more than a typical consumer looking for a 300 dollar
camera for vacation photos.

Obviously you haven't seen professional photographers at work.
Aside from maybe wedding and portrait pros, others are very rough
with their equipment - particualrly photojournalists.

Although it is off-topic, I have to agree with Mike. Pros abuse their cameras pretty often, even the wedding and portrait ones, unless they only work in a studio. I still have an age-old Pentax KX (pro SLR 25 years ago) that is tougher than any DSLR

 

[Mike Hunt]

I don't knowck the G6 overall, I just think they should have let
people know it was coming when the Pro1 was released.

Any person with a little knowledge of marketing and sales won't do
that. If you think an information could create a negative impact on
your sales target, you won't reveal that to the public.

I can understand this concept if you're about to release a product's successor and don't want to cut off sales of the soon to be replaced model (though this ain't exactly great for consumers now is it?). But here we're talking about this strategy being turned upside down to help sell a new product that you probably realize would not do well if people undertood its position in your product lineup. They misled folks about the G-series to get them to buy an otherwise less ap[pealing and expensive new product line.

 

[Mike Hunt]

As I said.
How can the camera can chose if the lightmeter won't work under low
light?

Even if you want to do it through EV compensation, it won't work
since EV compensation is based in the lightmeter.

Once again, if this is the issue, then why do they allow long
exposures in Tv mode, rather than limiting them to Manual? Won't
you have the same metering errors then?

I have said it millions of times to you.
I won't repeat it any more, use your brain or read my initial post
regarding this issue.

You're the only one who's brain dead as you have no understanding of either photography or simple logic.