Pay to Play

Jim Giberti · February 21st, 2009, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sterling Youngman

Don't give the bean counters any ideas.

This is simple stuff that they can probably modify in 30 minutes, then re-compile. But, as one person pointed out on another thread, he'll never buy another Canon lens if they don't make these changes, and that's a lot more than a couple hundred dollars to Canon. Of course, I already have $10K in Canon lenses and don't really feel like buying Nikon primes.

-S

By the way, that was me who said that. They're not mutually exclusive concepts.

Mike Calla · February 21st, 2009, 06:52 PM

Judging the difficulty in say, cineform (or any software hard/software company)trying to get what seems to be simple piece of software to work correctly 100% of the time or, even me trying to keep my all four of my WinXP machines running (yesterday I had to use a hex editor to change hexadecimal code to get my hard drive to show up in a fresh XP install!?!?! No wonder my parents hate computers) I’d say that it’s a wee bit more difficult than we think!!

m

Daniel Jackson · February 23rd, 2009, 11:57 AM

Considering how quickly Canon fixed the firmware for the banding/black dot issue it seems unlikely that they are even considering an aperture fix in a free firmware update. Canon fixed the banding/black dot issue because there was an issue with the proper functioning of the camera, but I am guessing that they don't see aperture/shutter/iso control as an embarrassing problem they need to fix. If Canon offered a firmware upgrade that cost $300 for those that wanted to pay for added functionality it might make sense for them. I have no idea how many units have been sold, but if 1000 people bought the update that would be $300,000 for what seems like a simple firmware fix.

Jon Fairhurst · February 23rd, 2009, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Jackson

If Canon offered a firmware upgrade that cost $300 for those that wanted to pay for added functionality it might make sense for them.

It might also make sense if/when sales slow and inventory starts to stack up, which could very well happen in this economy. News of a firmware upgrade would generate a lot of press and stimulate sales. If they still have a backlog of orders, there's not as much motivation to act - yet.

That said, I have no interest in Canon glass these days. Give me the update, and I will only shop for EF glass, since I'd get not only great video glass, but full photo compatibility. It's as simple as that.

February 21st, 2009, 06:52 PM	#17
Mike Calla Major Player Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Shanghai Posts: 344	Judging the difficulty in say, cineform (or any software hard/software company)trying to get what seems to be simple piece of software to work correctly 100% of the time or, even me trying to keep my all four of my WinXP machines running (yesterday I had to use a hex editor to change hexadecimal code to get my hard drive to show up in a fresh XP install!?!?! No wonder my parents hate computers) I’d say that it’s a wee bit more difficult than we think!! m __________________ boxoutsidemedia.com

February 23rd, 2009, 11:57 AM	#18
Daniel Jackson Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Claymont, Delaware Posts: 25	$300 Considering how quickly Canon fixed the firmware for the banding/black dot issue it seems unlikely that they are even considering an aperture fix in a free firmware update. Canon fixed the banding/black dot issue because there was an issue with the proper functioning of the camera, but I am guessing that they don't see aperture/shutter/iso control as an embarrassing problem they need to fix. If Canon offered a firmware upgrade that cost $300 for those that wanted to pay for added functionality it might make sense for them. I have no idea how many units have been sold, but if 1000 people bought the update that would be $300,000 for what seems like a simple firmware fix.