Canon finally dumps HORRIBLE Rebel body!

Discussion in 'Canon' started by RichA, Jan 24, 2008.

  1. RichA

    TH O Guest

    The Rebel is made for *small* hands. So if you are 5'6" or under, it
    must be great. But for anyone who is the size of a normal sized male
    adult, the body is too small.
    TH O, Jan 26, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. RichA

    dwight Guest

    No, sorry, disagree. I've heard this mantra repeated endlessly, and still
    disagree, because I actually USE the camera on a daily basis. I'm over 6'
    and have large hands, and the Rebel is just fine. And, as with everything
    else of this nature, handling becomes much easier with repeated use. I may
    have fumbled with buttons on the first day, but, y'know what - I got used to
    the camera's layout. It's fine.

    It's not custom form-fitted to my own hands, but the greatest capacity in
    human beings may be their ability to adapt. Here, I think "doesn't fit" is a
    matter of the mind, not the physical situation, because when I pick up my
    Rebel XT today, it fits.

    dwight, Jan 26, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA

    Robert Coe Guest

    : > On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 09:55:47 -0800, "Mr. Strat" <>
    : > wrote:
    : > : In article
    : > : <>,
    : > :
    : > : > Yes, a couple people I know refused to buy the Sony A700 because they
    : > : > thought it was ugly. Personally, it's secondary to me, but then you
    : > : > DO have to look at a camera each time you use it.
    : > :
    : > : I wouldn't buy it because it was a Sony.
    : > Good for you!! Sony's underhanded installation of spyware in their customers'
    : > computers makes them unworthy of the patronage of civilized people.
    : Do civilised people patronise Micros**t? :)

    Yes, but they don't use "Microsoft Update" (which, the last time I looked,
    appeared to have a much weaker privacy guarantee than its predecessor,
    "Windows Update").
    Robert Coe, Jan 26, 2008
  4. So your definition of Horrible is any camera that does not fit your
    hands. How about a camera that fits you, but may be too big to fit my
    hands (Actually my hands are on the large size) but you should get the
    point. No camera is going to fit everyone well. So by your definition
    every camera is horrible, which makes the term horrible meaningless in this

    BTW why is it that only Canon cameras have all the faults? Or is it
    that you only want to list faults (or your idea of faults) for Canon
    cameras. Do you have any idea of your lack of credibility?
    Joseph Meehan, Jan 27, 2008
  5. Exactly the same criticisms were made of Olympus back in 1973 when they
    introduced the M-1, hastily renamed the OM-1. It was too small for a
    real man's hands, a girl's camera. Well, those little OM-1s lived on,
    followed by OM-2, 3 & 4 from the same stable and imitated by every other
    because the "criticism" was just as much twaddle in the 1970s as it is
    Kennedy McEwen, Jan 27, 2008
  6. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Not at all. But I have to admit, a PROPERLY designed small metal
    camera would be a better offering from Canon than another malformation
    like the Rebel. You know what the laughable thing is? Both Nikon D40
    and Olympus's E-410, smaller than the Rebel, are BETTER designed. So
    you are right, size is only part of the issue, design is the other.
    RichA, Jan 27, 2008
  7. RichA

    RichA Guest

    RichA, Jan 27, 2008
  8. RichA

    RichA Guest

    You have to differentiate between a bad small design (Rebel) and a
    good small design, OM-1. No finger-pinching grips on the OM-1.
    RichA, Jan 27, 2008
  9. RichA

    dwight Guest

    dwight, Jan 27, 2008
  10. RichA

    dwight Guest

    It just occurred to me why you respout the knock on "finger-pinching grips."

    Trim your nails.

    dwight, Jan 27, 2008
  11. RichA

    TH O Guest

    Once again, bad reading comprehension ...

    Small SLRs are not horrible. Small SLRs with *horrendous* ergonomics are
    (i.e. the Rebel). Heck, Pentax made a tiny 110 SLR that had better
    ergonomics than the Rebel. Plastic cameras are not horrible. Plastic
    SLRS with cheap plastic shells that creak when squeezed and low quality
    buttons and dials are horrible.

    And "yes", the Canon Rebel is the only slr I'm slamming at this moment.
    Othen than Sony's entry level model, no other manufacturer makes an SLR
    so cheaply constructed. Olympus, Nikon, and Pentax all built their entry
    level SLRs with quality construction and good ergonomics.
    TH O, Jan 27, 2008
  12. RichA

    TH O Guest

    Glad it fits you. Unfortunately, how many other people have complained
    that it actually *hurts* to hold the Rebel for extended period of times
    because of the small grip and poor location of the shutter release which
    requires average hands to have to contort their index finger to an
    uncomfortable position. Do you think all these people made up how
    uncomfortable the Rebel was?
    TH O, Jan 27, 2008
  13. RichA

    rwalker Guest

    Thou doth protest too much. Who are all these people making these
    complaints? As someone with largish hands, I've never experienced any of
    these problems, and have never encountered another Rebel user who has
    expressed any of these concerns.
    rwalker, Jan 27, 2008
  14. ....
    Did you ever stop to think why you are the ONLY ONE who seems to believe
    what you write?
    Joseph Meehan, Jan 27, 2008
  15. I think you are wrong there. I believe his nails are worn down from
    dragging them on the ground. :)
    Joseph Meehan, Jan 27, 2008
  16. RichA

    Tony Polson Guest

    Clearly you have never handled a Sigma SD14.
    Tony Polson, Jan 27, 2008
  17. RichA

    dwight Guest

    Those are the same people who complain about carpal tunnel damage when using
    a computer keyboard. The fact that their hand position is completely wrong
    has nothing to do with it, I'm sure. It must be the keyboard.

    As to how many have complained, I have no idea. Never saw any statistics.
    And "all these people" with contorted index fingers? I guess I'll have to go
    to a photography show and look around to see if I can spot any.

    I suppose I could have used words like "many" or an undefined number like
    "thousands" to add weight to my own anecdotal testimony.

    dwight, Jan 27, 2008
  18. RichA

    Mr. Strat Guest

    Who would want to?
    Mr. Strat, Jan 27, 2008
  19. If people would just ignore the idiot, instead of debating it like it
    had valid points, then it would just dry up and blow away.
    Brion K. Lienhart, Jan 27, 2008
  20. RichA

    Doug Jewell Guest

    Actually, Rich is right for once here. The 350/400D's are
    the only cameras that I've found problems using, because my
    hands don't fit well on the grip.
    When I hold it, my middle finger rubs on the lens. After a
    day of using a 350, it had actually worn the skin off -
    quite painful. I have no dramas with any of the smaller
    compact bodies, including my S2IS which has a fairly similar
    grip design. I have no dramas with the smaller (eg E410) and
    larger SLRs. Some are not ideal for me to hold, but I can
    hold and use them no worries.
    I've had 2 physical injuries from the Canon Rebel series
    DSLRs - a 300D had poor fitting body parts that flexed in
    use, and so the camera "bit" me, giving me a blood blister.
    Then the 350D wore the skin off my finger. Glad to now be a
    Pentax K10D user.
    Doug Jewell, Jan 27, 2008
    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.