Canon speaks (Page 2): Hey, don't laugh at the Disc camera. I had one. It seemed like a good idea. It just took crappy photos. Even as I improved, it still took crappy photos. I think...

banjonut Loc: Southern Michigan

lukan wrote:

A Kodak Disc camera? Ha Ha! 1DMk4 + 70-200f2.8L Mk2 + 1.4tc.

Hey, don't laugh at the Disc camera. I had one. It seemed like a good idea. It just took crappy photos. Even as I improved, it still took crappy photos. I think if I had handed it to a Rick Sammon (for instance) the photos may have been more interesting, better composed and everything else that goes into it, but they would still be crappy. Just saying.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

jerryc41 wrote:

Actually, it's going to be one-lens-fits-all. It will have a squishy rubbery mount, so you'll be able to attach it to any camera. :D

They will have a new technology for bridge camaras. A lens blocker outer so that the lens can mount right over the built in lens. All bridge cameras will then have interchangeable capability.

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

banjonut wrote:

Hey, don't laugh at the Disc camera. I had one. It seemed like a good idea. It just took crappy photos. Even as I improved, it still took crappy photos. I think if I had handed it to a Rick Sammon (for instance) the photos may have been more interesting, better composed and everything else that goes into it, but they would still be crappy. Just saying.

I edited the post too late... You caught the original! The crappiest photos I ever took we're with my Instamatic 40 years ago! I wish I had a 1DMk4 and that L glass then. It would've blown everyone's minds, especially since digital photography had not yet been invented.

banjonut Loc: Southern Michigan

lukan wrote:

I edited the post too late... You caught the original! The crappiest photos I ever took we're with my Instamatic 40 years ago! I wish I had a 1DMk4 and that L glass then. It would've blown everyone's minds, especially since digital photography had not yet been invented.

And if you had that camera then, the only way to view the photos would be on the back of the camera. Better go with the largest screen possible.

I have said for many years, that if I could go back in time and take one technology with me, it would be refrigeration. I don't know why.

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

banjonut wrote:

And if you had that camera then, the only way to view the photos would be on the back of the camera. Better go with the largest screen possible.

I have said for many years, that if I could go back in time and take one technology with me, it would be refrigeration. I don't know why.

And air conditioning. It's a miracle.

Swamp Gator Loc: Coastal South Carolina

I read recently that Canon supposedly has plans to slowly start getting out of the P&S market.
With so many people always having a camera available in their phone, the compact P&S is becoming less relevant every day.

countrydan1

Please bear with me on this. Yes, a crappy lens is bad, but photograpy is not about the price of a lens or camera, or the brand of camera you have. I personally prefer Sony, but others are just as good. My point is this. I know a man who uses a cheap Nikon point and shoot. His pictures rival any I have seen from any photographer (except Ansel Adams :)
It is a combination of knowing how and when to use light to your advantage, composition, focus and dozens of other decisions that make a great photograph. Admittedly, I have very few that fit this category, but behind the viewfinder is what really counts.

countrydan1

Please bear with me on this. Yes, a crappy lens is bad, but photograhy is not about the price of a lens or camera, or the brand of camera you have. I personally prefer Sony, but others are just as good. My point is this. I know a man who uses a cheap Nikon point and shoot. His pictures rival any I have seen from any photographer (except Ansel Adams :)
It is a combination of knowing how and when to use light to your advantage, composition, focus and dozens of other decisions that make a great photograph. Admittedly, I have very few that fit this category, but behind the viewfinder is what really counts.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

countrydan1 wrote:

Please bear with me on this. Yes, a crappy lens is... (show quote)

Canon implies that the lens is what makes great photos. The next ad in the promotion will imply that a camera is totally un necessary. And they will be introducing the newest evolution in digital photography EOS NCN lenses. Electro Optical System No Camera Necessary.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

And to think, they could have saved a boat load of money by going to the San Diego zoo and taking the same image with an iPhone. I've got 10 of those shots on my camera right now.

ocbeyer Loc: Baltimore

Cdouthitt wrote:

And to think, they could have saved a boat load of money by going to the San Diego zoo and taking the same image with an iPhone. I've got 10 of those shots on my camera right now.

Just thinking that. What makes this such a great shot anyway? This may as well have been an ad for an airline.

ASR666 Loc: Singapore

Check out this video. Pro camera + kit lens OR Average camera + expensive lens ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hk5IMmEDWH4

Hando Rei Loc: Long Island New York

This is a marketing tactic ! The company sells photographic equipment and is promoting at this time their lenses. This is to be expected . I also am a believer that half the job is good equipment .

AdkHiker Loc: Northeast

jerryc41 wrote:

Finally! They key to great pictures: cheap camera with a Canon lens.

Be nice Jerry

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Maybe it's me, but composition wise, the photo rather sucks. The main subject's feet and trunk are cut off, on the right side there's a half off an elephant's butt showing, and I'm hoping the other elephant behind the main one isn't sniffing the rear of the front elephant like a dog.
If this is what constitutes a "Great" photo, then I certainly must be doing something wrong.