<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Engadget - Comments for Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance </title>
<link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link>
<description>Engadget Comments for Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance </description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA['chubby girl']]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[htd]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 5:02PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[One word: Ugly.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[The Number 1 Cubs Fan]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 5:02PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[Two words: very ugly.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[gad get]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 5:14PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[two words made into one word, fugly.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[StalematE]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 6:35PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[sorry im not 4 i dont like the color :(]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[KAIKAI]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 5:02PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[LoLz!  OMG! I wuz totally gonna say the same thing...<br><br>Sorry, I don't have anything personal against kaikai, but I do have a general aversion to people that can't type complete sentences.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[BJ is Gooder]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 5:24PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[im sorry bj<br>i figured full sentences were not a requirement for the internet :(]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[KAIKAI]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 5:28PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[No problem, as long as you truly are wearing a sad face. :)]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[BJ is Gooder]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 5:32PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[I think the label is wrong shouldn't the camera say "FisherPrice" on it?<br>]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[FLaSHBaCK]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 5:21PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[It looks like a toy one would give to a 4 year old.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[computer.dude.28]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 5:21PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[Well. That was original.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Lowest Ranked]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 6:49PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[Wow the ugliest camera i saw in my entire life and i'm not young]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Stefan]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 5:38PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[Well, well, looks like we've come a very long way since I've purchased my G3 in spring 2003, which still happens to be my main camera (yeah, I don't photograph much and no, I don't care for resolution), hence I didn't really follow the trends.<br><br>Back then, $183 bought you... I don't know, maybe a 1.3 MP Hewlett-Packard camera with CMOS sensor, fix-focus plastic lens, producing blurry images with yucky, washed-out colors? Details and sharpness weren't the issue, *everything* looked bad, and most definitely not only in the lowest price class. I still remember myself looking at the results several chubby"professional" class Sony cameras with elaborate optics, from before '03, being in total disbelief about the appalling fact any random disposable camera could easily surpass them in terms of image quality (under normal conditions).<br><br>But oh gee, I'm getting sentimental. I don't care for the pastel-baby-color design, but apart from the pictures being a good bit more grainy and mushy than what I get from my G3, I must confess I don't think they look that bad. And if that quality is really only to satisfy a child, not even one that has (already) developped some photographic ambitions, I really, REALLY feel like a Neanderthal. <br>A Neanderthal, still having the picture of that atrocious red-yellowish Fisherprice camera carved in one of his mental stone boards. <br><br><br>]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[MarbleMind]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 5:42PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[Girlish pink? Oh yeah I'm hella getting that one, even if i would prefer manish Pink. Seriously though, I'm getting sick of manufacturers releasing supposedly 20 bagillion megapixel cameras like that's the only thing that matters. ]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Valicore]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 5:58PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[I think the color makes it even uglier than it really is.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Jinto]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 6:01PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[It seems like a classic mistake that manufacturers make.<br>Go all out on the surface design, aiming to be cool in some way, but then not bothering to make the product actually good.<br><br>]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Greg Mcp]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 6:03PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[I hear you, man, I really do. Every time I hear laymen ignorantly babble about the "importance" of resolution, I'm instantly reminded of the in my book absolutely legendary Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1. Even for 2003, the 2 megapixel CCD was puny, and here certainly not just from a laymen point of view. It was just enough for 4"x6" and maybe 5"x7.5" printouts. <br>But DAMN. Did these printouts look GOOD. High contrast, rich colors, excellent sharpness, just about everything you would expect from a photograph that simply looks nice, thanks to a large, very high quality CCD and a generously big Leica fast lens. Oh, and it had a 12x optical zoom thrown in for good measure. <br><br>Price of all the goodness? A mere $449.<br><br>Did anyone aside from experts give a bloody darn? You guessed it.<br><br>Panasonic illustrated a big point. Possibly the most important one ever made in history of digital photography. Sadly, people were too busy celebrating the release of the first 5 mpx cameras to notice.<br><br>That's why we will have a ton of 80 mpx cameras with pinhead sized CCDs and flimsy third rate glass optics with the diameter of a rat contact lens in only a few years.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[MarbleMind]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 6:39PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[Are you talking to the voices in your marble-headed mind again?]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Lowest Ranked]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 6:51PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[No, the voices have, as usual at this hour, already relapsed into silence (it's 1 o'clock here). After 16 hours of babbling, they become somewhat too exhausted to go on. I was (trying to) reply to Valicore.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[MarbleMind]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 7:04PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[what the hell is with all these cougar banner ads? i thought we shipped Palin back to AK anyway]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[phanbouy]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 7:45PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[It looks like it uses film.  That was not a compliment.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Peter]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 6th 2008 9:32PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[it uses AA batteries .... hence it's not slim & sexy.<br><br>a lot of people out there like the ability to use AA batteries.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Knives_Out]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 7th 2008 12:41AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[Kinda seems like a "Hello Kitty' logo should be where the Canon logo sits,]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[yrag]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 7th 2008 2:59AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[All of the sudden, this camera gets many online reviews (designed for women by women, or for young people by young people, not sure what the most popular phrase is, surely not for Schwarzeneggers by Schwarzeneggers).<br><a href="http://www.dprguru.com/?model=170018423&mfg=0" rel="nofollow">http://www.dprguru.com/?model=170018423&mfg=0</a><br>]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[amit]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 7th 2008 3:47AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[It looks like something from the 1990s. (The Chrysler Neon)]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[MisterJom]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 7th 2008 6:41AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Canon Powershot E1 reviewed: a little style, not so much substance ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/06/canon-powershot-e1-reviewed-a-little-style-not-so-much-substan/</guid><description><![CDATA[What's with canon all of a sudden? they pulled several good cameras and introduced nothing but shoddy point-and-shoots that are more bulky and uglier than before and have less options, and are using their old digic3 processor instead of their newly developed 4.<br>I wonder if that new company philisophy will also travel to their semi-pro and pro line, if so; say bye-bye to canon.<br>]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Wwhat]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Nov 7th 2008 3:46PM</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
