Re: Canon EOS 20D - is this review fair?

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 19:48:59 +1000, Pixby <pixby_douglas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>Alan Browne wrote:
>> Peter Guest wrote:
>>
>>> Excerpts from a review of the EOS20D from a leading UK magazine:
>>
>>
>> What's unfair?
>>
>> 1- It has a known underexposure bias and is equipped with exp-comp, so
>> adjust as required.
>>
>> 2- Auto focus dependance is a bad habit, esp. if you use multiple
>> points. I doubt the camera scores high on mind reading either.
>>
>> 3- Post capture processing. Makes sense. It does depend on what
>> you're subject matter is and the end use, of course.
>>
>> 4- Spot metering: yes this is definite negative, esp. as highlights are
>> so easilly blown out. OTOH, for most shooting that most people do, a
>> review of the result in the monitor provides quick feedback.
>>
>> Should you buy it? Sure. Or no.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Alan.
>>
>Your answers are over simplistic Alan. The cameras are not predictable
>in their wandering exposure values. Nor can they be relied on to focus
>properly when the toggle is active for selection of focus points. The
>"grip" now in the process of a recall is really a very poor substitute
>for a decent body design.
>
>It's not until you use a 'real' Professional camera like a 1Ds or Nikon
>D2X that you discover how rough the consumer DSLR cameras actually are.
>Unless Canon come up with some production controls and post assembly
>testing procedures, any replacement for the 20D or 1D II will be no
>better. With Nikon now a really viable alternative to Canon in the
>Professional range, it won't be long before they get some stiff
>competition in the consumer DSLR range too.

Speaking of quality control, what is "E99?" It popped up on
a Canon I was using (Rebel XT) and I keep hearing about it
from users. What does the code mean? You have to remove the lens,
turn the camera off and on again.
-Rich
.

Loading