I think this all is nothing but intentional to give some credibility of non-retouched imagery (as much as it is possible).
In the end, either way we would have complaints.
- How come my camera doesn't produce anything even close to those images in the promotional materials, have I got a faulty product?
While I mentioned something similar a couple of posts ago, there is a counter argument:
Most photographers (or rather: camera owners) are, subjectively speaking, mediocre. They/we are incredibly far from doing the best possible for a given camera.
As there is no lower limit to mediocreness, how incompetent should Canon produce their marketing images in order to ensure that every single customer was able to produce something close to it?
I'd think that customers accept that marketing material tries to portrait a product in the very best light (pun intended) possible. "With tailwindwind, downhill and meatballs for dinner" is a saying in my native language that might not translate very well speaking about the very fastest that e.g. a car can drive.
If Canon shot marketing images for the 750D using a MFDB, this would clearly violate the subjective expectations of their marketing-reading customers (and would be a scoop for MFDB manufacturers). But using their very best (handpicked) lenses, very best manual focusing technique, some tasteful photoshopping before shipping a jpeg? I think that is sensible.
-h
