Canon 20D: Full dpreview

Discussion in 'Canon' started by deryck lant, Nov 3, 2004.

  1. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    Phil is becoming sloppy with many errors and omissions.

    I couldn't find the low-light AF focus test.

    Or shot to shot time using single shot in Raw after the purposely
    restricted 6 shot buffer.

    The centre focus cross type sensor does operate with aperture f5.6
    as well as f2.8. At F2.8 the sensor uses different elements giving 3
    times the accuracy.

    No mention of lens used in today's samples gallery. I didn't bother to
    explore the EXIF data.

    Pity the shutter/mirror are so loud. It would have been an ideal camera
    for use in available light work during live performances in theatre.

    The response from Nikon will be fascinating. Trouble is a long time to
    hang on for. Release at the PMA show but not available until later on year.

    Nikon have promised 5 tiers of DSLR cameras. D70 entry level - just been
    reduced to £780ish including the excellent !8-70mm lens (this lens would
    be classed as an L class lens in Canon speak as it incorporates 3 ED

    The D100/D200.

    A New semi-pro camera.

    Then the D1/D2 series.

    Then what?

    deryck lant, Nov 3, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. deryck  lant

    Lou Guest

    He also chose to ignore many reported problems with the camera, many
    pros don't trust it and many others have had all sorts of problems
    that Canon seems to be ignoring.

    Maybe a new item should be added to the reviews called reliability or
    significant problems reported.

    Oh, well - I will hang on to my very reliable D60.

    Lou, Nov 3, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    The message <>
    The review has now been amended adding lens used for samples.
    deryck lant, Nov 3, 2004
  4. deryck  lant

    Lou Guest

    He must not read his own forums or any others. Canon may have sent
    him a 20D that had been well checked out.

    I would hope that any complete review would make mention of the
    problems reported by the pros at least, they amount to more than a

    Lou, Nov 4, 2004
  5. deryck  lant

    Skip M Guest

    The review states that the firmware is 1.0.5, the latest firmware update, so
    it would be expected that there would be no, or at least fewer, issues with
    the camera.
    Skip M, Nov 4, 2004
  6. deryck  lant

    Ken Tough Guest

    Lenses? What's making me think heavily about going 20D instead
    of D70 is the availability of a reasonable consumer mid-telephoto
    with image stabilisation.

    If Nikon comes out with an AF-S VR 70-200 DX f4.5-5.6, it'll
    be the bomb.
    Ken Tough, Nov 4, 2004
  7. deryck  lant

    John Doe Guest

    I found the review to be very interesting myself. I think the review does a
    big dis-service to potential buyers. I doesn't mention anyplace any of the
    problems that some have and are still having with the 20D. While I
    understand that no everyone has had problems (or will admit to having
    problems) and that the reviewer may or may not have had problems the fact
    that others have reported these problems and that the firmware upgrade from
    1.02 to 1.04 killed some of the cameras deserves to be mentioned to give
    potential buyers a heads up.

    I for one do not trust the camera and probably will not trust upgrading the
    firmware on it ever again. I was one that had the thing die after the 1.02
    to 1.04 firmware upgrade. Even after following all of the instructions to
    the letter.

    I lost a lot of respect for DPReview with this review. It comes across more
    that he wants to sell the camera to make money then provide a good solid
    honest review that covers the good and potential bad of it.

    John Doe, Nov 4, 2004
  8. deryck  lant

    MarkH Guest

    Without knowing what percentage of 20D users have had a problem it is hard
    to know whether to agree with you or not.

    DPreview did test a production camera that came with 1.05, if less than 1%
    of such cameras have the issues that we have heard about then I see no
    reason to mention the problem.
    MarkH, Nov 5, 2004
  9. deryck  lant

    Rich Powell Guest

    Unless you are one of the folks who received and returned
    Actually Phil was asked about the lockup problems in his forums and he said
    that he had heard of them but never experienced any in the camera he
    reviewed. There clearly is a problem with some cameras, but I think that
    the number of affected camera's is probably quite small. I haven't
    experienced it, but haven't had mine for long.
    Rich Powell, Nov 6, 2004
  10. deryck  lant

    John Doe Guest

    It doesn't matter if he did or didn't have problems or even how many people
    had problems. The fact remains that some did have problems and this should
    have been mentioned. It would have been fine if he would have put in context
    that he didn't have any problems with either of the two 20Ds and that he
    isn't certain how many people actually had problems but that problems have
    been reported. It is the responsible thing to do and what a good reviewer
    should have done. Without it, it looks like he got kick backs from Canon to
    keep his mouth shut to help them sell more faulty cameras.

    John Doe, Nov 6, 2004
  11. deryck  lant

    John Doe Guest

    But that doesn't change the fact he should have mentioned the problems that
    some were having. His review is misleading and not honest without it.

    John Doe, Nov 6, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.