XSi the reviews for teenagers

I am stunned by the shift of the target in terms of pure age of the reviews I read about this new camera.

letsgodigital reports press releases making difficult to understand what's editorial and what's marketing: what drives the editorial? the canon marketing department?.

For letsgodigital the camera comes from Canon USA Inc. (but it's made in Japan, as far as I know.. let me see again.. yes, it says "Inc." the Inc thing is the reference of the guy or girl who wrote the press release: people at letsgodigital: see the difference? come on.. ), and again for letsgodital it's evident the shift towards the pro (whatever it means) features included and then the choice of the SD cards as a clear "bridge" between the P&S segment and the entry level (not pro anymore). I believe that whoever wrote the press releases (at Canon's) didn't know how to arrange the contradiction better. And letsgodigital reports without even blinking.

then DPReview (from the name of the site one can expect a .. review?): well the site had the camera "in the studio" (what studio? is he a photographer now? LOL) and then the same press releases rearranged: not a word about the pictures.. I mean.. They had the camera and report on the "looks" only? How old is he? 12?

this is the new "teenager" cut of the reviewers.

now either they decide to go to work for real or give up and post the press releases without the "review" in the name of the business they do (for a living).

until then I'll keep laughing reading the "dressed" press releases passing for "editorial" work. like they are "photographers" with a studio and know how to write all by themselves. They don't. Forget about the review, but at least some decency.

I'm guessing you are old(er)

dpreview has a "brief hands" on which goes into a little more depth than just "the looks" of the camera. BTW I'm sure he is older than 12 but if he isn't it really doesn't make a difference to me.

http://www.dpreview.co​m …04canoneos450dh​andson.asp

I believe it is still too early to expect a full blown review of the camera. It's only been like a week since it was announced?

antonello wrote in post #4798267
me? I don't do the "reviewer" for a living, don't see what my age has to do with anything.
and those are the press releases rearranged.. believe me, I know..

Your age has nothing to do with anything, neither does the age of the reviewer. IMO that is...

Hey the review guy is back!

Typically DPReview.com won't report on image quality of pre-production cameras, and sometimes this is at the request of Canon. There is still things that can change from now until the consumers actually have the camera's in their hands.

AFAIK, in the US, Canon gear is distributed through Canon USA, Inc (as per their website), which also does its own marketing and post-sales service. Not familiar with letsgodigital but assume it's probably US based if it's quoting Canon US.

There is no formal review posted on dpreview yet, just a Canon press release, a brief 'hands on' and a chart showing differences - all posted as news releases. As Timnosenzo said, dpreview doesn't publish reviews of cameras until after they've hit the streets (and sometimes not then - it gives more weight to the consumer end of the market than the professional end).

Their testing is consistent and generally well-regarded for being independent and thorough. Though there may be debate about the relative merits of individual tests they conduct, it's probably about as good as you'll get for what it covers (which isn't absolutely everything, but about as far as you can go for comparing current models from different manufacturers, which is what dpreview is about).

I got nothing from that. Are you 12? That's who the write up seems to be written by.

With no links it's hard to comment on what you are discussing here on the forum.

But, I don't think there are any actual reviews yet, it's only been announced and we would be looking at nothing more than press releases.

If there are actual reviews, please link us up.

But SOP for all -lace like this is until they have the ability to do a full review they regurgitate the press release info and little more. This is as I say SOP for most any news/review/magazine etc.

the caption in the DPR "hands on" relating to the SD card is wrong though.
It most certainly is not the first Canon DSLR to except SD cards, the MkII had this capability back in 2004.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #4799940
With no links it's hard to comment on what you are discussing here on the forum.

the content of the press release is copyrighted. I can't link to it and I won't. The same way I don't like my work to be linked without my consent.

The point is this:
I do something for a living (say I take pictures for a living) and I deliver my work professionally (say a photo album or a collection for a brochure) : I don't cut and paste from another catalog! I produce my own work.

Now back to the professional reviews: what do they do? ... see what I mean?

only Imaging Resource wrote something original (still "reading" from the product pictures provided by canon). But at least IR was clear that they only had the marketing material from Canon! They don't "pretend" to have the camera and write their own stuff (that the others don't). The letsgodigital "piece" starts with the exact reproduction of the Canon USA press release (they-Canon- made a mistake calling the camera "Conon Inc.'s" and letsgodigital didn't even see it.. LOL
Again IR (Imaging Resource) when it comes to post a press release do post that the source is (indeed) a "press release". At least they are honest. They still don't produce a real editorial work in that case, but at least they don't pass it as their own .


The SD card thing is a clear marketing decision. The 1DII had it too, but to backup the CF, and that's different (very).

Again the reviewers didn't really comment on that. And the LCD is 230,000 pixels (it's clear on the canon's press release) but hard to find in the "reviews". I couldn't find that info at least...

like I said this looks to me the new "teenager" cut of the reviews


Teenager reviewer:
I don't really test anything (it's not important) what's important are the looks and stuff like the "cool" features and everything. Who cares about the pictures (in the teens' world)

that's more like it.

eheh


now the real meaning of my post:
the marketing people write the press releases to give "ideas" to the editors : they don't expect that all they do is to cut and paste the releases.. that's not what serious editors do.
But if you do that I'm pretty sure about the laughs that you get from the other editors.

...

you can link to a press release.
its a press release, they WANT people to read it.

I believe this is the article you're talking about?
http://www.letsgodigit​al.org/en/18087/canon-eos-rebel-xsi/

^In other words, you can't copy and paste it sign your name on it and make some money. Sounds like teenager logic is all up in here on more than one thing. *snaps fingers*

_aravena wrote in post #4800837
^In other words, you can't copy and paste it sign your name on it and make some money. Sounds like teenager logic is all up in here on more than one thing. *snaps fingers*

and that will be the exact opposite of the meaning of your work when your job is to "review".

I can't understand anything in this thread so far. What does a link have to do with copyright?

It sounds to me like the OP doesn't understand the meaning of a pre-release press kit. (and has it out for reviews, apparently).

If you put content on the web, then there is nothing even remotely inappropriate about linking to that content. Why else would it be on the internet, labeled press release? Do you refuse to let other people look at a book or magazine you own? Do you refuse to look at them in the store? Perhaps the publisher has to personally invite you to read the work?

Apparently he wants to rant about something and get some agreement on it 'cause his thinking is beyond genius and produce nothing for us to disagree or agree with.