image.canon How to change image download folders

[jeclose]

Yes, still befuddled by this new camera and not happy with not being able to DIRECTLY connect to my computer, but I've already ranted about that.   

Now this:   I set up the wireless download with Image.Canon, which asked me to setup download destination folders according to certain "rules", which I now find a little too opaque and complicated, so I want to go back INTO that setting and change what I initially set up.   I've already scoured the Image.Canon  FAQs and elsewhere but cannot find HOW to make that change - or even if it is possible.   One FAQ suggests that you can do new sorting rules, but it's only about sorting according to image content.   I simply want to set up a different folder and call it "download".   Am I missing something or is this another function that Canon decided users shouldn't be able to control on their own after initial setup?  And remember:  I'm downloading to a COMPUTER.  

[jeclose]

Yes, I'm aware that I can connect a USB cable to download the images, but it's fussy to do so, as you have pry off a cover designed for dainty little Japanese fingers, and then plug the USB cord into the camera and then the computer (yes, COMPUTER).   It's just way easier to push a button on the camera and connect (as was the case with the 360 HS), and then let my photo software do the rest.  So much easier.   I also note that with this change (and who really cares, as a customer, about whether Canon's cloud software is mature and robust?) I now have to manually delete downloaded images from the camera, when before with the camera-computer connection, the software would erase the images from the camera.  Again, Canon took something that was simple and streamlined and made it more tedious and complicated.   Progress - at least so they think.

[SignifDigits]

I actually consider the change in automatic file deletion an improvement.  I don't like some system deciding that "yes, I downloaded those and will now delete them".  If the "apparent" success was a failure (and that sometimes happens) - files would be lost and gone forever.    Same goes for ANY camera (or device, for that matter) downloading files in my opinion.  

[jeclose]

Yes, I might have meant to say "give me an option as to automatic deletion".   This camera gives you no option, and neither did its predecessor - it was my photo software that gave me the option of erasing the images from the camera.  Again, an option.   
If Canon is listening, and they can make the changes that I fervently hope for with a firmware update, that would be great, but I'm not holding my breath.   Going forward, they should be mindful of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" as a motto for everything they do.

[shadowsports]

This sounds overly complicated just by a card reader.  Card out of camera, card into reader, reader connected computer.  Done.

A direct connection is much faster than a wireless connection too.  

[jeclose]

Yup - that's an alternative, but one I don't like.  The card is a micro card about the size of a fingernail - hard to extract, easy to lose, and all that.   I don't want to take it out unless I have to.   The vlogger whose video I posted also mentions this:   Why a micro SD card?   It makes no practical sense that I (or the vlogger) can see.   Add that to my list of complaints.  

[SignifDigits]

I totally don't get why they decided to move from full SD to micro SD - not sure what they needed that extra real estate for.  It's counterintuitive to say "ok, so we're redesigning now so that if you want to put files on your computer your best option is to take the card out of the camera" and "oh, by the way we're moving to a much less convenient sized card for removal to use a card reader".  That's definitely an off-putting decision for folks moving files from camera to computer like you.  And Mini-USB?  Really?  I'm guessing that there was no compelling reason to change that as they didn't increase the download speed to take advantage of USB-C.  I'm guessing that the price of mini-USB cables is above that of USB-C these days as that tech is so old that nobody wants to continue to mass manufacture them.

It shows that it pays to do our homework on newer versions of tech before we plunk down the cash.  Newer isn't always better.  I'm guessing the same is true of other things.  I doubt any new laserjet printer has the durability of the originals. 

I get why you're disappointed in whoever made the decisions about your product.  But we are all human, and imperfect, and it was an imperfect human and/or group of them that did so, so it's bound to happen sometimes.  Hopefully that product team and management above them will take appropriate steps to not make the same missteps.

[jeclose]

Your reflections are well-taken; one point that I haven't made is that I didn't choose this camera as a purchase - it was sent to me as a "replacement" when I sent in my 360 HS for repair to the Canon "Repair Center".   The reason that is in quotations marks is because they apparently don't do any repairs - at least with these cameras - they just send you a replacement, promising that you will receive a refurbished camera, the same make and model.   Well, that isn't actually true, because I didn't get a 360 HS in return, I got the decidedly less-desireable 360 HS A which I dreaded even before I received it, based on what I had read after learning that was the camera I would be receiving as a "replacement".   I had no choice in the matter, despite pleading on several occasions to send me a 360 HS, and to scour every cubbyhole and corner at Canon to find one, but they said they simply didn't have any (I still don't quite believe that).   So that's why I'm stuck with this camera - not by choice.     

[SignifDigits]

Even though I understand your frustration and disappointment I do believe them.  They do a LOT of repairs. See https://canon.jp/support/repair/period.  They cannot support every model, and I do believe them regarding not having your model on hand if it is no longer supported.  Here is the list of what Canon DOES repair and the end of repair dates for those models that are planned for sunset.  As you can see there are a lot of models supported that they DO repair.  I would prefer to see the number of models reduced, but they are in several very competitive businesses so who am I to judge?

Also, it speaks well that Canon sent you a new unit matching your old one as best as they reasonably could.

These are Japanese model names, so your camera would have a different name there.

I personally think you are wasting your time complaining and expecting Canon to accommodate your desire for a firmware change that will satisfy you.  That camera is a very small part of their overall business and in my opinion them sinking the cost in firmware for that product is highly unlikely to occur. 

I believe you would be happier if you traded in the new unit that Canon sent you and bought a used unit with a warranty from someone like MPB.  You might have to pay $50-$100, but it sounds like the money would be well spent if the original camera model and features that you had would really and truly make you happier and ease your stress levels.  I believe the international model for your camera is Ixus 285 HS.  I can personally speak to MPB dealing fairly on trade-in evaluations.

Again, I don't represent Canon nor speak for Canon on this.  That is just my opinion.  

[jeclose]

Thanks for the tip about MPB - I did look them up and put in a request for a quote for the 360 HS A.  I also see that they have two 285 HS's for sale, so I may give your suggestion some serious consideration.   I may also just resign myself to this camera as it is - I have only used it a few times since receiving it.   You can get used to something, even if it isn't what you want or like - that's life.   I've registered my objections to the camera design, and that's the best I can do.