Anybody have direct experience on the Canon EOS Rebel Xsi?

In article ,
wrote:

I seem to remember you from a while back... you were the turkey who didn't
believe that computer monitors could have resolutions that weren't aspect
correct...

i remember that thread, and it was someone else.

added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

On Fri, 23 May 2008 21:03:44 +0100, savvo
wrote:

On 2008-05-23, HEMI-Powered wrote:
savvo added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

How much of a **** do you give about what Canon say about their
camera? Look at page 16 of the XSi/450D manual. It would appear
they are lying too.

http://www.savvo.co.uk/images/eos450d-p16.png
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...delInfoAct&fca
teg oryid=139&modelid=16303#DownloadDetailAct

I don't try to reason with fools, so you think whatever pleases
you even if it is dead wrong. But, if you decide to pull your head
out of your ass, go to some store and look for yourself. EOT

Well, I could do that. But when I did and I found that a real life
450D looks exactly the same as the switchless one in the manual, in
every picture on Canon's adverts, in every picture one can find on
numerous websites, would that get your thick head out of your fat
ass?

Just be a man and admit your mistake, you're digging a really
pointless hole for yourself.


Ignore the posts from this **** hole, he is the biggest TROLL on the
news groups!

He obviously has never seen the camera or a lens, or he would have
taken the lens off and see the switch goes with it!

Or maybe he's too ****in stupid to remove the lens... or know what a
lens is...


**** You and the elitist, prima donna horse you rode in on!


--
HP, aka Jerry

"If it waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck"

nospam added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

In article ,
HEMI-Powered wrote:

you're just as FUBAR as the rest of the idiot elitists and prima
donnas here that simply refuse to believe what other people say
when it conflicts with some ****-ass dpreview review or an
erroneous user manual.

do i understand this correctly?

canon designed the camera and wrote the user manual, but somehow,
they got the location of the switch totally wrong. for some reason,
not a single person noticed the error until just the other day, when
you bought your camera. is that right?

have you contacted canon to have them fix the user manual? did you
alert phil askey at dpreview to update his website? it's best that
they issue an errata soon, because a lot of people will be looking
for that switch in the wrong place, and we can't have that happen.
they might even switch to nikon in frustration.

I have found that reality trumps all the other cards in the
game of life, so if you want to go around with your head stuck up
your ass while insulting people who know more than you do, well,
feel free.

if you insist.

I don't know nor do I care, nitwit, whether Canon ****ed up the book or
the Camera. What I do care about is that it works as advertised, the
switches are all exactly where I say they are, you're full of ****, and
if you don't mind, please **** Off.


--
HP, aka Jerry

"If it waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck"

Wilba added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

nospam wrote:
HEMI-Powered wrote:

you're just as FUBAR as the rest of the idiot elitists and prima
donnas here that simply refuse to believe what other people say
when it conflicts with some ****-ass dpreview review or an
erroneous user manual.

do i understand this correctly?

canon designed the camera and wrote the user manual, but somehow,
they got the location of the switch totally wrong. for some
reason, not a single person noticed the error until just the other
day, when you bought your camera. is that right?

have you contacted canon to have them fix the user manual? did you
alert phil askey at dpreview to update his website? it's best that
they issue an errata soon, because a lot of people will be looking
for that switch in the wrong place, and we can't have that happen.
they might even switch to nikon in frustration.

I have found that reality trumps all the other cards in the
game of life, so if you want to go around with your head stuck up
your ass while insulting people who know more than you do, well,
feel free.

if you insist.

I haven't enjoyed a thread this much in ages. :-D

HEMI, dearest, I am one of those anybodys who has direct experience
of that camera. I've had mine for two weeks now. Trust me, I do know
what I'm talking about.

On page 34 of your manual it shows you how to detach THE LENS (the
cylindrical glassy bit where the lens cap goes), from THE BODY (the
chunky bit that has the shutter button on top and says "EOS" and
"XSi" or "450D" on the front). Try that.

Now ... which bit, THE LENS, or, THE BODY, has the switch on it that
is labelled -

STABILIZER
ON | | OFF

No, idiot, the kit lens has NO switch - the IS on-off switch is on the
lens mount of the body!

?

If you can't manage that, give us a link to a photo of the camera
you have, which shows the IS switch. Please? If you are right, that
will prove it forever without question.

PS: would someone please reply to HEMI so that I can see his reply?
(I plonked him years ago.)

What is wrong with all you idiots? I don't give a Flying **** what the
manual does or does not say! Morons, I'm telling you where the God Damn
switch is, if you don't believe it, well stick you head up your ass and
rotate on your elbows for all I care. YOu really have to get ahold of
yourself and learn the difference between fiction and reality. Now,
blow.


--
HP, aka Jerry

"If it waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck"

added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

On Fri, 23 May 2008 18:44:09 GMT, "HEMI-Powered"
wrote:


you're just as FUBAR as the rest of the idiot elitists and prima
donnas here that simply refuse to believe what other people say when
it conflicts with some ****-ass dpreview review or an erroneous user
manual. I have found that reality trumps all the other cards in the
game of life, so if you want to go around with your head stuck up
your ass while insulting people who know more than you do, well,
feel free.


The Canon EOS450D does not have internal body image stabilization...
ask Canon if you don't believe me...

asshole, I discoverd the body don't got no IS days ago, but the ****ing
switch IS on the body, it tells an IS-capable LENS what to do, so what
exactly is your major malfunction here?

Only the lens can have that function with that camera...

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...nfoAct&fcatego
ryid=139&modelid=16303#ModelFeaturesAct


I seem to remember you from a while back... you were the turkey who
didn't believe that computer monitors could have resolutions that
weren't aspect correct...

Ah, yes. You were full of **** then and still am - looked at monitors
again just yesterday, this time on computers. Guess what, imbecile, a
Gateway or LG or Samsung or, or, or ... ALL support about every God
Damn resolution imaginable including one that is just plain ludicrous
on a 24" Gateway wide-screen 16:9, namely 1280 x 2560. Now, I really
don't give a Flying **** if you do or don't believe it as I don't
intend to reason any further with fools who only read incorrectly
written manuals instead of doing the intelligent thing - look at the
****ing HW either your own eyes.

Man you are one dumb sack of ****!!!

Not, hardly, but you are.


PLEASE go away, you are making everyone here sick.

And, if I don't, asshole, you're gonna do what?


--
HP, aka Jerry

"If it waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck"

nospam added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

In article ,
wrote:

I seem to remember you from a while back... you were the turkey
who didn't believe that computer monitors could have resolutions
that weren't aspect correct...

i remember that thread, and it was someone else.

No, it was me, and I failed in 5, count 'em, 5 attempts to get an
intelligent human at Samsung to even admit their monitor could do
anything except the full native resolution 1920 x 1150 or some such
(whatever is 16:9 and 1920). And, just yesterday I looked at 3 or 4
brands of 24" wide-screens actually hooked to computers and they DO
support multiple resolutions and multiple aspect ratios including 4:3,
3:2, 16:9 and some out past Mars. The point is that the monitor will TRY
to display whatever Windoze and your video card claims it wants, or it
will blow up trying.

--
HP, aka Jerry

"If it waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck"

In article , HEMI-Powered
wrote:

I seem to remember you from a while back... you were the turkey
who didn't believe that computer monitors could have resolutions
that weren't aspect correct...

i remember that thread, and it was someone else.

No, it was me,

i was thinking of the thread where someone thought lcd displays only
had 4x3 aspect ratios, otherwise everything would be stretched or
squished, despite all of the wide screen displays that are available
that all look correct. that thread wasn't you.

and I failed in 5, count 'em, 5 attempts to get an
intelligent human at Samsung

you don't say!

The point is that the monitor will TRY
to display whatever Windoze and your video card claims it wants, or it
will blow up trying.

unfortunately in this case, it did not.

HEMI-Powered wrote:
Wilba added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

nospam wrote:
HEMI-Powered wrote:

you're just as FUBAR as the rest of the idiot elitists and prima
donnas here that simply refuse to believe what other people say
when it conflicts with some ****-ass dpreview review or an
erroneous user manual.
do i understand this correctly?

canon designed the camera and wrote the user manual, but somehow,
they got the location of the switch totally wrong. for some
reason, not a single person noticed the error until just the other
day, when you bought your camera. is that right?

have you contacted canon to have them fix the user manual? did you
alert phil askey at dpreview to update his website? it's best that
they issue an errata soon, because a lot of people will be looking
for that switch in the wrong place, and we can't have that happen.
they might even switch to nikon in frustration.

I have found that reality trumps all the other cards in the
game of life, so if you want to go around with your head stuck up
your ass while insulting people who know more than you do, well,
feel free.
if you insist.
I haven't enjoyed a thread this much in ages. :-D

HEMI, dearest, I am one of those anybodys who has direct experience
of that camera. I've had mine for two weeks now. Trust me, I do know
what I'm talking about.

On page 34 of your manual it shows you how to detach THE LENS (the
cylindrical glassy bit where the lens cap goes), from THE BODY (the
chunky bit that has the shutter button on top and says "EOS" and
"XSi" or "450D" on the front). Try that.

Now ... which bit, THE LENS, or, THE BODY, has the switch on it that
is labelled -

STABILIZER
ON | | OFF

No, idiot, the kit lens has NO switch - the IS on-off switch is on the
lens mount of the body!
?

If you can't manage that, give us a link to a photo of the camera
you have, which shows the IS switch. Please? If you are right, that
will prove it forever without question.

PS: would someone please reply to HEMI so that I can see his reply?
(I plonked him years ago.)

What is wrong with all you idiots? I don't give a Flying **** what the
manual does or does not say! Morons, I'm telling you where the God Damn
switch is, if you don't believe it, well stick you head up your ass and
rotate on your elbows for all I care. YOu really have to get ahold of
yourself and learn the difference between fiction and reality. Now,
blow.



Then we idiot's do not know what the purpose of the switch since the
manual is incorrect and have no reference to assist you. Please contact
Canon or the shop you purchased your camera from.

--

Len

HEMI-Powered wrote:
Wilba wrote:

HEMI, dearest, I am one of those anybodys who has direct experience
of that camera. I've had mine for two weeks now. Trust me, I do know
what I'm talking about.

On page 34 of your manual it shows you how to detach THE LENS
(the cylindrical glassy bit where the lens cap goes), from THE BODY
(the chunky bit that has the shutter button on top and says "EOS" and
"XSi" or "450D" on the front). Try that.

Now ... which bit, THE LENS, or, THE BODY, has the switch on it
that is labelled -

STABILIZER
ON | | OFF

No, idiot, the kit lens has NO switch - the IS on-off switch is on the
lens mount of the body!

Oh, you didn't try it! I'm so disappointed in you.

If you can't manage that, give us a link to a photo of the camera
you have, which shows the IS switch. Please? If you are right, that
will prove it forever without question.

What is wrong with all you idiots? I don't give a Flying **** what the
manual does or does not say!

Do you give a FF about the truth? Detach the lens from the body and you will
know it. Please don't reply until you do.

Go on ... you know deep down the truth will set you free.

Morons, I'm telling you where the God Damn switch is, if you don't
believe it, well stick you head up your ass and rotate on your elbows
for all I care.

You don't care? OK, we won't be hearing from you again?

YOu really have to get ahold of yourself and learn the difference
between fiction and reality.

You know how to do it - do it! PROVE us all wrong.

Now, blow.

Doesn't matter how hard I blow, it won't put an IS switch on my 450D. But
you know that, you're just being silly.

l v added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

HEMI-Powered wrote:
Wilba added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

nospam wrote:
HEMI-Powered wrote:

you're just as FUBAR as the rest of the idiot elitists and prima
donnas here that simply refuse to believe what other people say
when it conflicts with some ****-ass dpreview review or an
erroneous user manual.
do i understand this correctly?

canon designed the camera and wrote the user manual, but somehow,
they got the location of the switch totally wrong. for some
reason, not a single person noticed the error until just the
other day, when you bought your camera. is that right?

have you contacted canon to have them fix the user manual? did
you alert phil askey at dpreview to update his website? it's
best that they issue an errata soon, because a lot of people will
be looking for that switch in the wrong place, and we can't have
that happen. they might even switch to nikon in frustration.

I have found that reality trumps all the other cards in the
game of life, so if you want to go around with your head stuck
up your ass while insulting people who know more than you do,
well, feel free. if you insist.
I haven't enjoyed a thread this much in ages. :-D

HEMI, dearest, I am one of those anybodys who has direct
experience of that camera. I've had mine for two weeks now. Trust
me, I do know what I'm talking about.

On page 34 of your manual it shows you how to detach THE LENS (the
cylindrical glassy bit where the lens cap goes), from THE BODY
(the chunky bit that has the shutter button on top and says "EOS"
and "XSi" or "450D" on the front). Try that.

Now ... which bit, THE LENS, or, THE BODY, has the switch on it
that is labelled -

STABILIZER
ON | | OFF

No, idiot, the kit lens has NO switch - the IS on-off switch is on
the lens mount of the body!
?

If you can't manage that, give us a link to a photo of the camera
you have, which shows the IS switch. Please? If you are right,
that will prove it forever without question.

PS: would someone please reply to HEMI so that I can see his
reply? (I plonked him years ago.)

What is wrong with all you idiots? I don't give a Flying **** what
the manual does or does not say! Morons, I'm telling you where the
God Damn switch is, if you don't believe it, well stick you head up
your ass and rotate on your elbows for all I care. YOu really have
to get ahold of yourself and learn the difference between fiction
and reality. Now, blow.



Then we idiot's do not know what the purpose of the switch since the
manual is incorrect and have no reference to assist you. Please
contact Canon or the shop you purchased your camera from.

give it a rest. in a contest between what a manual says or doesn't say
and what you can actually see someplace on the camera body and/or lens
and/or another accessory like an external flash, then reality wins
evertime. Look at my sig, that's what this is all about. You simply
cannot dispute a switch on the lens mount of the body just above the
AF-M switch as not being there no matter if the manual says it is or
the manual say it isn't. God Damn it, go to your nearest camera store -
in the U.S., I don't know what international EOS cameras have and I
also don't care - and look for yourself! what do you possibly have to
gain except to look like an ass?

--
HP, aka Jerry

"If it waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck"