Template talk:Canon EOS film cameras

What do you think?

Kgyt/Canon_EOS_film_cameras – kgyt (talk) 19:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ohh. I just saw your question after I made a little change. I made the film camera table and the digital camera table have the same categories.

I LOVE your addition of more camera bodies. Make sure you add all that variation info in the actual page for those camera bodies. Can you fit them into the 3 categories??

Here's what I think: the 1V is still on sale and in production, so it should go into 2014, not stop at 2012. Don't forget about the cross reference to the Digital EOS page at the bottom. Also, you should indicate what a grey box means, since you have orange, purple, and red boxes covered. And last, use the same categories that the Digital EOS template and this film EOS template are currently using (professional, enthusiast, entry-level).

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.201.174.85 (talk) 20:36, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DONE: – kgyt (talk) 21:39, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Linking with the DSLR table

Does anyone know how to add a little link at the bottom that links to the complementary DSLR table? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.201.174.85 (talk) 15:56, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Angerdan (talk) 20:53, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of alternative names

I think it was a very bad idea to delete the alternative names for every model a month ago. This table has really helped me in the past to find my way among the EOS cameras exactly due to this feature of also giving the alternative names. In case anybody's interested, here's the old, much more clear and intuitive table: [1] --2003:71:4E16:4B25:9CFE:EC73:92BC:1419 (talk) 19:37, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For this purpose there's a list of all EOS film cameras, which even offers sorted names: Canon EOS#Film cameras
Including all the information in the timeline would make it to bulky to use.
Maybe someone like to extract the list into a new template and/or add the class:sortable tag. --Angerdan (talk) 20:51, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong wikitable

Angerdan, your edit is a big sh*t. :-) The wikitable is wrong. -- kgyt (talk) 22:57, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have some objective argument, any source which proofes the table isn't correct and a solution which you can proof with an source? I can also link to this article:
http://cweb.canon.jp/e-support/products/eos/180530eos1v-end.html --Angerdan (talk) 17:44, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]