--- Skip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I
> don't want to sound like a curmudgeon, and I realize
> that Canon has to
> build a camera to the widest possible audience, but
> I wonder how much of
> these feature laden cameras go to waste.
I suspect that, on any single body, quite a few
features go to waste. Some buyers will never use the
wireless flash capability, but absolutely depend on 7
fps. Other's will never use 45 AF points, but will
wear out flash units with the wireless feature. Some
may never use an PB-E2, but use ECF all the time.
So what should Canon do? Make 6 different models,
each with a subset of features (and probably a 50%
higher price due to lower volume runs)? Of should
they make one camera that has all these features, and
let you ignore the ones you don't need. Seems like
number 2 makes the most sense.
Your idea of cusomizable chips is fine, but where's
the real advantage to not having the functions at all
comopared to just ignoring them. I dont' see your
suggestion saving any money, because the cost of all
these features doesn't come from burning them in
silicon, but in developing them in the first place.
And the body would still need all the hardware to
support ECF, wireless flash, etc, even if you didn't
plug in the software to control it.
Face it, no camera maker can afford to build and sell
a camera that has exactly those features you want, and
nothing else. Because it's entirely possible that no
one but you would buy it.
=====
Bob Meyer
Life is uncertain. Eat dessert first.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
