I got my lovely Olympus C4040-Z in 2002, and got it second-hand. It works beautifully, and I've never needed to take it in for servicing. Olympus isn't paying me to say that, and I don't consider it terribly exceptional. I do find it surprising that Canon would say this about the camera which took the leaked photos of the new Harry Potter book:
"From what we know, the device is one of the original Rebel cameras, probably a 350D, and given that they've been out for three years, it's likely the owner would have had it cleaned or repaired in that time."
First, that Canon would volunteer to reveal customer information should make you think twice about their services. Second, why would they brag about the fact that their cameras need servicing within 3 years?
- Log in to post comments
Actually, I don't think that it's at all surprising for a camera company to expect cleaning or servicing of a digital SLR within three years. No matter how careful you are, if you change lenses on a dSLR some dust is going to get into the camera body and eventually onto the CCD screen. There's only so much you can do to clean that yourself, and if you aren't careful it's easy to totally screw up the camera trying to do it yourself.
So far, I haven't had my Pentax istDs cleaned, but I'm really starting to think about it since I'm starting to see dust specs on images more and more often. I've had it for just under 3 years right now.
If a digital camera has a nonremovable lens, it would be very unusual for it to need servicing in only three years. Olympus cameras have an ultrasonic device that dislodges dust from the CCD, which is an indication of what a serious problem it is for digital cameras with removable lenses.
My C2100-UZ Olympus still works great, but I have little need now for a 2.1mpx camera. A shame, because it has a fabulous lens.
That said, why would someone want to do such a thing? Reveal the ending and spoil other people's fun. It's a special kind of vandalism.
As I understand it, the leaker photo'd and posted every single page of the book. Not just the ending. How does that spoil anyone's fun? How about you just not look at the photos?
Well I'm not much of a fiction reader, but what I get from my office mates is that they are reveling in the fun of a million people all finding out the answer at once. The book is being released to the whole world at once. I know whole families that are buying multiple copies so they can all read it together. Presumably overhearing illicit chitchat from outside the game pokes holes in it.
Not my brew, but I'm all for people enjoying harmless fun together. Perhaps I am anti-social. Recently I was cleaning my basement and found Arthur C. Clarke's essay collection, Voices From The Sky, and have been having having a ball reading it.
@cephyn
How would you like it if you were awaiting the ending of a series a decade in the making, and at the midnight release, some jackass drove along and shouted out the ending to the entire crowd? There are people that seem to relish ruining other peoples' fun, and that's why this is a big deal.
Exactly. It reminds me of that scene where people are waiting in line for a Star Wars movie, and Homer Simpson walks out of the theater and says loudly; "Wow, I didn't see that coming - who would have thought Darth Vader is Luke's father?!"
I don't know how much impact it should have. I believe it would take a real ass to spoil it for someone else, but the book being online does not change that. If someone buys it at midnight (at least here in South Africa, I think they go on sale at the same time regardless of time zone), and reads it before I can pick up a copy on Monday (for example), and tells me the ending, (s)he is still an ass.
And, yes, it is the entire book. It's fine, I have not read a single Harry Potter book. I am waiting until I have seen all the movies. Of course, then I will know what happens, but I have chosen to trade that for the fact that the book is always better than the movie.