The Friday, March 9 issue from the Singapore magazine “TODAY” posted the [shoplink 29545 ebay]Canon G1 X[/shoplink] advertising you can see here on top. It shows a completely false sensor size comparison made up to clearly discredit the Micro Four Thirds system. The right size comparison should look like this:
Now, in defense of Canon I know well that very often the Marketing Campaigns are created by local advertising companies and probably the head of the Canon Marketing department doesn’t even know that this is going on. But in the era of Internet such fake way to do advertising will have a viral and negative effect for them. UPDATE: As noted by many readers the sensor size corresponds to that from the [shoplink 25767 ebay]Nikon 1 system[/shoplink]. So maybe the Canon marketing guys confused the Micro Four Thirds sensor with the Nikon 1 sensor? But than again how can Canon do a mistake like that???
At least this proves that for Canon Micro Four Thirds is the main and strongest competitor 🙂
And click here to see the full page of the Canon page on the magazine. It was our reader Ben to find this…Thanks!
P:S.: Frank reported this on CanonWatch.
85 Responses
Does Singapore have an equivalent of the UK’s ASA – Advertising Standards Authority?
I don’t think so !
M4/3 to proceed legal action against Canon .
That must be a typo. They intended to say Nikon CX instead of Micro 4/3″.
Just a typo, you’re right.
Though not the first time when somebody uses false advertising against MFT…
Yep, Samsung did something like that over a year ago.
Indeed. And now this “mistake”. But those who are interested in sensorsize will probably also know this is nonsense. In the end, this backfires.
Look at the aspect ratio of the indicated Micro Four Thirds area.
It isn’t 4:3, rather 3:2, so they deliberately erased CX and replaced with a falsification.
Pretty nasty marketing by Canon! Shame on you, *astards!
Not only that, they also removed APS-C (Canon) & (Standard) to make it look like Canon is the standard size, BS! I am so fed up! That’s it I am buying NEX-7 the hell with you G1X!
It seems that the labeling got mingled up: The sensor size marked “micro four thirds” actually seems to coincide with the Nikon CX format. But Canon’s marketing department may still hope that potential customers take this graphics for real.
if that where to be true it would justify the chunkyness of the G1X.
so bad this cheap dirty tricks appear. i think that the system camera users won´t look for such a camera anyway since m4/3 has now plenty of good optics and relaively cheap good performer bodies.
it shows that they are afraid of u43!..
+10
Yep, while Panasonic, Olympus, Voigtländer, SLR Magic , Samyang, etc. have been steadily building the impressive and varied Micro Four Thirds SYSTEM, Canon has been sitting on the sidelines churning out their dull and uninspired low-end DSLRs, ELPHs and whatnot. Even Nikon has outmaneuvered them with the Nikon 1 system.
So, now Canon resorts to cheap advertising tricks.
Desperate times need desperate measures!
Shows without doubt the thinking progress in the Canon camp.
the sad thing is that most people in the market for the g1x have no idea about the sensor size of m43 and just believe the ad and think its the only alternative to a dslr 🙁
cheap move lol
Reminds me of the cheap Samsung ISO comparisons, that were completely bogus. And you know what, it backfired when it turned out that NX10 was no better than m43.
Same will happen here, at least for me. A company that needs to lie like this can forget my custom.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/SensorSizes.svg
For comparative sizes. Four Thirds = 17.3mm x 13mm. Not far off it, is it…
I also like how People (mainly big sensor users) think that M43 is smaller.
That’s the benefit. It’s the same size sensor as Four Thirds. The mount and body is smaller, but the sensor isn’t.
4/3 is nearer 35mm size than 35mm is. The 35mm film format uses vertical feed and gives what is today a half frame, as opposed to the horizontal feed that gives double frame on 35mm film. So 35mm still cameras use 35 x 2. The only real 35mm SLR is the Olympus PenF. Which I can say as an owner is a nice handy camera and the lenses work well on 43 and m43 as do most other camera lenses ever made, giving m43 one of the largest range of lenses available. (NEX and Nikon v can also handle most lenses made, OK, accepted)
“So 35mm still cameras use 35 x 2”
Huh?
What are you talking about?
So called FF digital still cams of today have a sensor size very close to the old 135 film format, IOW 24x36mm. The term FF is not good though, as lots of other formats are also full format, as no sensor cropping is going on (hence 4/3 is also FF). Any sensor utilizing the image circle to its full is FF. Derogation from FF doesn’t happen before you shoot different aspect ratios on the same sensor, or do optical cropping onto the sensor itself (i.e. when shooting w/ DX lenses on an FX Nikon body). IMO 135 would be a better term for cams having a 24x36mm sensor.
What he’s talking about is that in 35 mm film runs through a cine camera vertically. The frames are not next to but on top of each other. 35 mm film was after all originally cine film.
Was that news written by “Frank”? The English is clearly different, and he shows Canon insiderdom.
No it’s me! Whenerver Frank will write a post here you will see his signature.
oh no….Frank is going to have a rough go of it!!!! LOL!
Thanks for clarification. Still, this post sounds so different.
guys, I am watching you…
🙂
So we will have to be on our best behaviour and make no more anti Canon comments! 🙂
Yes, by the size comparison it looks like its supposed to be Nikon CX, not m43. The advertising agency thought Nikon CX is m43?
Don’t blame advertising agencies. They can NEVER make mistakes that are seen in public.
Many comments here indicate that sensor size is still a soft spot. The whole point of 4/3 (and m4/3) is that it doesn’t matter. Let Canon lie if they wish and relax. There is no reason for this inferiority complex.
Admin, Robin Wong posted the second part of his OM-D review!
Thanks!
Holy crap, I think im going to sell my 5dmkii and get this one.
Yeah, thanks for the link! Very useful indeed! Looks good to me!
Thanks for the heads up, but where is the link?
http://robinwong.blogspot.com/
Robin has a great blog! Thx for link.
I love Robin Wong’s reviews. His photography is REALLY fun and his enthusiasm is contagious. Great images. The OM continues to perform well and deliver. I looked at some of my images from my GX1 and I have to say that the performance is similar from a quality stand point. Comparatively I usually shoot with NR at -2 (which is off in Panyland) and I think NR on -1 or O would be about like NR on “Low” for the Oly.
Great review. The OM camera is compelling when looking at the overall MFT system, especially at that pricepoint for what else is out there. Nice addition!
You mean NF, not NR.
NF = Noise Filtering (for ISO noise)
NR = Noise Reduction (hot pixel elimination by dark frame subtraction)
Well I mean NR… exactly what it says on the camera menu on the Panasonic GX1.
Robin refers to it as NF on the Olympus. I believe it is two different designations for the same thing. No?
I was at Schiphol airport yesterday and the clueless salespersonel at the electronics store had the Nikon 1 system labeled as Four Thirds while next to the actual Oly and Pana product.
Schiphol? is that similar to schizophrenic, depending on the way one looks at it?
for some, micro four thirds had become synonym for mirrorless – and in the beginning that was not so far from the truth. But today, it’s obviously totally inaccurate if not dishonest to label it like that.
they (canon) should be forced to replace the marketing campaign with a correcting marketing campaign showing actual sensor sizes.
After this that would be a total eyeopener, and introduce many people to m4/3 😉
It seems they have mistaken the Nikon size for the 4/3rds size.
How can somebody make advertising with such a silly mistake with comparison that 80% of the users won´t even know what it is about ..I would fire all who are behind this…
BANG BANG LOL 😉
+1 😀
If that ad ran in the US the only thing it shows me is “Impending Litigation”!
such stupid ads will only backfire and shows Canon pressure from the 4/3 sensor system… shame on CANON
Unparalleled image quality, LOL
Even the E-M5 equipped with the slightly smaller G3 sensor has visible better quality, not speaking about NEX-5n/NEX-7…
I like how you consistently spread the G3 sensor meme.
Yeah he’s a “Goebbels”.
He probably think’s too, that if something is said oft enough it becomes fact.
Who cares about the sensor anyway.
E-M5 have G5 sensor. E-M5 have G5 sensor. E-M5 have G5 sensor……….
😉 I get your drift.
Sorry, but Olympus is the “bad guy” here, not me.
It’s a really cheap marketing trick to keep the manufacturer in secret, moreover, when the specifications and RAW quality are surprisingly close and lots of reviewers expect to be the same 16 MP Panasonic sensor.
Have the lots of reviewers been reading your posts or have you been reading theirs.
Have a look at the actual sensor sizes in MP and then at their usable pixels, see if they are the same.
Derogative Marketing? Absolutely!
Samsung dit it. Sony did it. And now Canon as well.
It is for sure the strongest maketing argument they can use against FT & MFT. What else can they downplay?
But take a look at the iPhone and the iPad successes by being small and efficient. Both are revolutions in their markets, and see what they’ve done to kill the Netbook and traditional portable Laptop markets, as well as what camera phones with video does to entry level DSC.
But Panasonic and Olympus needs to march and the same pace, better synchronism please. Otherwise, you end up loosing what’s originally was your brainchild…
LIES!
forget about the add…check out part 2 of Robin review, night shots
http://robinwong.blogspot.com/2012/03/olympus-om-d-e-m5-review-bukit-bintang.html
have a nice weekend, guys…
Robin review would make many people to consider to have The OM-D E-M5 as their second system of their camera without a doubt,.is really convincing ,..now bring up more GLASS OLy & Panna
This is free m43 advertising.
All advertising is good advertising 😛
I am not going to buy Canon…
1. MFT in first picture, FT in second
2. what if the sensor are aligned in center or aligned in left bottom¿
So you have No clue. 😉
Maxp there is no difference between mtf and ft sensors.
I think this is more likely some advertising copy writer pushing the envelope or making a mistake than an official Canon position. Although some companies such as Samsung have obviously got form for this. As someone pointed out yesterday the 4/3 sensor is virtually the same size as the Canon sensor if you look at the whole sensor and not just the part used. In fact it is not clear whether the Canon sensor size given is the whole sensor size, or the used part of the sensor.
It’s all a bit silly because for quite a few years I’ve used both 4/3 and APS-C and regard them as virtually the same size. If you crop Canon APS-C to 4:3 and take a sliver off the top it is 4/3 size. On a regular basis Canon APS-C users crop to less than 4/3 size. It only takes a slight crop to get there, and people who photograph birds etc, regularly crop more than that.
Also as a Canon user I think the G1X is an annoying distraction and I don’t know what Canon were playing at. No EVF, the other G cams used to have a good macro ability, but not this lump. As far as I’m concerned the G1X is just a Canon strategy to buy itself a bit more time before it has to make a decision on mirrorless ILC. Canon are dragging their feet because they are worried about the impact on their entry level DSLRs, which is most likely why Nikon went CX. I also think Canon have been playing around with the idea of m4/3 hence the G1X sensor. It’s the optimum size for a mirrorless format, and Canon have to decide do they make their own new format, do they join m4/3 or do they go APS-C and make it hard for themselves to produce lenses that match the body size.
I really don’t know why people still want an entry level DSLR in this day and age. Mirrorless cameras (especially the Nikon 1) have really fast AF (fast enough for kids) and adequate image quality. EVFs are more than good enough for most situations. (I definitely prefer a good EVF to a cheap tunnel-vision penta-MIRROR optical finder.) Do people think bigger is better?
I doubt many people are trying to build up a lens collection anyway. Most people have no more than 2 f/5.6 zoom lenses.
Also, most people do not want razor-thin DoF. Being able to use a larger aperture for a given DoF with a smaller sensor will compensate for the slight deficiency in ISO performance.
It is called “false advertisement” and Canon can be sued for it. And should be sued for it.
Is it Canon US/NA? Then it is clear. Even most ardent Canon fans get sometimes turned off by their false advertisements. Few years ago there were this huge row about Canon ad (for 1Dx or 5Dx) where they took a shot of photographers from a sports event and dumbly painted in photoshop all those huge long lenses white to pretend that they were all the Canon Ls.
Otherwise, a sign of desperation.
Robin’s review part II: I’m impressed by
* high ISO performance
* IS
* WB operation
as compared to the E-P3. Using the E-P3, there always tend to be redish dots in the night sky/shadows, the IS works – but not as well as in Robin’s pictures, and the WB does not work well in dim light outdoors or indoors (typically giving a yellowish color).
If m43 is achieving good result with a sensor half the size of G1X, then it shows how poorly Canon’s sensor is performing. I used to be a faithful Canon follower, everytime when there is new model of G series, I’ll get one. But after G7, I switched to m43 (GF1), never regreted.
What if Nikon makes a similar add, showing the 1.6x Canon APS-C that small in comparison w/ the Nikon 1.5x APS-C? Guess that would make Canon happy!
Frankly, I don’t think this is a typo in the ad. If Canon have not designed the ad themselves, Canon will surely make some QC before publishing it. And had the ad showed the sensor proportions the other way around, showing the Canon as the smaller one, it would have been corrected for sure! Now it is not. So don’t tell me they have not read it… Lousy trick, lousy moral 🙁
Honestly, I think this has been done on purpose, “as if it’s a typo”. I would be happy to see Canon paying some huge amount of money for such a “mistake”.
Also, I noticed, that if they indicated m43 properly, there would not be place to write all that text starting with ” 1,5′ blah-blah…”, because the sensors are almost identical in size.
That is why they should not have mentioned m43 sensors at all, but they could not miss the opportunity to shit on the ones they envy 🙂
Sensor Envy. Hmmm.
Similar to Penis Envy, yes Dr. Freud?
Not sensor, off course. I meant m43’s rapidly growing market share. This was obviously meant to make harm to competitors.
Because most of the time Ad Agencies doesn’t know squat about technicalities of the products they advertise. I know because I work in one. Also sometimes the clients in the marketing side doesn’t know squat about technical details of their own products.
How true!
Come on, it isn’t Canons fault as they are depressed. They work hard to make an ugly confusing G1x Camera, even using the G Panasonic mar-key. Then Pentax, of all people, out did them with the so ugly it is cute K-01. 🙂
it’s an intentional mistake! people who’ve seen that on the papers already brainwashed that m4/3 is that small against G1X! that’s a cheapshot!
Wont help Canon, G1 X is decent compact, but no competition to any mirrorless. Crappy fixed lens wont help no matter how good is sensor behind..
sue em, they’ll figure out the difference between right and wrong after the first 20 mill
Honest mistake? Maybe. The real test is whether or not they correct, and apologize for, the mistake, in print.
Advertising agencies cannot make mistakes that are seen by the public.
its a cheap shot by canon …
in fact that should be their slogan,
the “canon cheap shot”
they knew exactly what they were doing with this false comparison ….it reeks of desperation… unfortunately when the set out to make this class of camera, they have no idea what their doing
its a big doofy clumsy lame lensed camera from canon , for them its a tradition
the s90 s95 is the only decent non slr they make period …the rest is all crap …………………. 800 dollar crap
CANON finally learned something from Samsung.
Olympus legal should send them a “courtesy notice” ASAP.