« It Has Arrived | Main | Come-Hither Accessories »

Wednesday, 17 October 2007


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

After being snubbed by Canon during the Mark III intro, DP has failed to even do a minimal review. Seems to be a shoot-your self-in-the-foot situation. Having a chip on one's shoulder does not bode well for a reviewer.

Mike, that is not overly fair - In the last twelve months DP Review has reviewed 2 Nikon, two Pentax and one each Panasonic and Olympus SLRs. They are so far behind that I would imagine no manufacturer would be particularly interested in giving a rare pre-release camera to it. It seems that Nikon continue to do so. Of released cameras there has not yet been a review of the Canon 1D MkIII nor the Canon 40D - you can expect the review of the Olympus to be later than those. The benefits of a preview (regurgitation of press material to all intents) to a manufacturer is limited.

Fully spot-on comment, Mike.

I have been following dpreview for a long time and what you say is exactly what happened. I waited for ages for their E510 review and still, today, it is not available there, in spite of being in the market for several months already.

It is expected that brands such as Olympus or Pentax are not too enthusiastic on sending their products to Phil, since the reports at dpreview are not exactly a model of objectivity about brands. And most people interested in photography realize that.

I was thinking exactly the same thing, Mike. If you take a close look you'll notice that the last full-length review they did of anything other than a point-and-shoot camera was back in July (the Leica M8). Everything else has been a "preview" of features and functions rather than a full review.

There's also very little original editorial content. DP Review consists almost entirely of reviews/previews, press releases, and discussion forums that are the online equivalent of a bar brawl. In short, it's not exactly the most congenial environment for a product launch.

Streuth, the volume of posts in D.R. re the non availability of a review sample and the petulance of Mr Askey !
Just how influential are these review sites I wonder. In the overall scheme of things what is the number of readers vs the overall market numbers. Given its an English language site and that we are dealing with an international market how many potential owners read these words of wisdom ? Enthusiasts will read DR for its excellent technical details but I for one have learned to ignore the rest.

Eh. This is the kind of "controvery" typical for DP Review, with lots of virtual ink spilled, lots of shouting and lots of bruised egos.

Here's how I see it: Phil wants to get camera announcements and test cameras before any other website so that DP Review becomes "the" place to go for camera reviews so that ad revenues go up (even though he sold the site, I'm sure the contract made certain payments conditional on the site's continued performance). If any camera manufacturer doesn't inform Phil of a new camera first, or provide him with one of the first test cameras, he gets his undies in a bunch and childishly complains about the fact in public. He probably also brags to the manufacturers about his web traffic and threatens to lower their exposure on the site if it happens again.

Camera manufacturers (including Canon) are probably looking to reduce DP Review's importance in order to lower advertising rates. They are probably tired of Phil's antics, as well. As a result, they are starting to stop giving DP Review preferential treatment and are spreading information and test cameras to other websites to foster competition. In short, this is probably turning into a pissing match of sorts.

For what it's worth, I don't really care whether Phil reviews Olympus SLRs or not. That's not because the Olympus SLRs don't interest me. It's because DP Review is (kind of) his site, he can pick which cameras he reviews and when he reviews them however he wants. If he wants to focus on cameras from the manufacturers with the largest market share, he's free to do so. That doesn't mean I think its the right decision. Someone else will review these cameras and DP Review will eventually lose traffic.

And while we complain about reviews of point and shoots, I'm sure all the people who are looking for advice on which point and shoot to buy are tired of the $1,000+ SLRs getting all the attention.

What I don't get is why DP Review has so much trouble getting reviews out on time. I know they are thorough and want to get things right, but hire some more people, for crying out loud! I doubt the reviewers get paid much, and I'm sure the site brings in tons of ad revenue.

Anyway, despite the length of this post, I can't really bring myself to care about Phil's temper tantrum.


Oly 510 last I remember the sample camera sent to reviewers have issues with exposure (or some small problems). I venture to guess by the time they(dpr) receive the fixed 510 they were busy integrating their company with amazon.

Historically dpr reviews come in waves and they compare generations of cameras. So I again, venture to guess this is the case for 510 vs recent ones, such as the canon 40d etc etc.

Separately, I think in general reviewers should do everything they can to *get* review cameras. Blaming and firing shots across everyone's chess isn't the best idea.

Wow. Now, I wonder where the journalistic bias really lies.

If you were a busy web site which put alot of effort into reviews, which would you do? Review the models generating more (numerical) interest and arrive at the right time, or to ones that don't?

In those dpreview forums you can see all posts by an individual together. Take a look at the battering from fanboys Phil has gotten over all these years of hard work. I'm amazed he even tries to explain himself anymore.

Right Paul.
As with all reviews you can only extract the (for you) important facts and ignore the opinionated stuff. You have to know your priorities and get a feeling of what counts for the reviewer, what type of shooter he is. That is only possible with some experience.

Let's face the fact: in the first place you have to handle a lot of different cameras over a longer period of time, i.e. posess them ;-), before you get the feeling of what is important for you. For example i could have never imagined how much i would love an E-1 before i actually put my hands on one. From then i learned that viewfinders for example are a very subjective thing. Reviewers often rate the E-1's tunnel-like, but i never looked back, not even to film-slrs, because it looks great to me. And i was a sucker for big viewfinders once, until i realised, that the F3's is even too big for my taste, forcing the eye to literally scan the area... Well, only an example and a bit offtopic.

Just wanted to say that is important to rely on your own judgement, which is a tautology on the other hand ;-)

No need to blame anybody. Only Phil and Olympus know what really is at the heart of all this. I could care less personally.....

I can read spec and features from a manufacturers own website.

Give me someone who knows the camera well and has used it in a multitude of real life situations, not just a test studio or the same six pics out the front door or round the corner any day of the week.

I'm thinking of those guys who got hands on Nikons....The wedding guy and the sports shooter. Much more informative than someone who reviews dozens and dozens of cameras.

So Mike......why not give a little ringy to Olympus USA and see what you can do bout that? ;-)

Well some of the latest developments in the E-3 affair seem rather less dramatic.


Browsing through the comments in related threads shows how quick people are to build conspiracies out of close to nothing.

I am sure people who have been expecting this camera for years will not be waiting for the review (or maybe not mind a few extra months...).

I couldn't agree with this more. It seems to me that Phil Askey has forgotten that the site is nothing without its readers, and those readers will drift to others if reviews are not forthcoming. The lack of review for the 1D MkIII and E-510 is inexcusable, there should be a 40D review up by now (bearing in mind the sheer numbers this will sell). Is he really surprised that neither Canon nor Olympus seem overly chummy when he treats their products this way? A sense of ego rising this way comes....

The site has the ability to be hugely influential, simply by doing 2 things. Firstly, devote time to the in-depth reviews they became famous for. Secondly, moderate the forums to weed out those people who can only be described as mentally unwell.

[[since the reports at dpreview are not exactly a model of objectivity about brands. And most people interested in photography realize that.]]

I find it very funny that people take reviews so personally. That because site A didn't give the camera you bought glowing reviews you think there is some huge conspiracy/bias on the part of the review site.

Comments that dpreview.com is biased towards one manufacturer or the other are pure nonsense. Such claims are nothing more than immature and childish responses to a /single/ data point.

You hit it right on the head Mike, I love DP review for the in depth info but they do take forever for certain reviews and seem to show a certain bias. Their comment on their site about not having one for a preview sure didn't sound very professional either. It took them forever to give the mighty Pentax K10 a full review and even then it only earned a cautionary "Highly Recommended (Just)" rating. Give me a break. By the way I love this site, there is always great stuff to read all the time. Thanks very much!

DPReview is *VERY* influential, especially among people who don't do photography as a full time hobby.

There's a girl in my office who just bought an S5 based solely off information on DPR. I didn't send her there. She found it herself, and was impressed by their appearance and aire of independence.

This appearance isn't just a facade -- I think it IS the most thorough and reliable source of information on any camera. Unfortunately, this thoroughness comes at a cost: time. Phil and crew are very slow to review any camera that comes across their desks, and only preview those that have a very loud buzz about them.

Given their review style, I think this is the right way to do things. It gets the most information about the most sought after machines quickly, and gets information about the more sleeper machines eventually. But I don't for a second blame Olympus for not devoting a costly review model to a site who might not review it for a year (M8, what?)

Oh, and please don't claim DPReview has some bias against Olympus and Pentax. They may have been slower to review these cameras in the last round of SLR updates, but they gave all of them glowing reviews.

There was 8 weeks between the time the old DPreview test lab shut down (end of lease) and the time the new test lab was ready. So, how many reviews are you going to have with no test facilities?

Besides, Phil explains all of this including his relationship with Oly clearly in the forums.

Well, if I were in Olympus marketing I might try to repair the relationship. I can't see how it benefits them to be on the outs with Phil. But what do I know?

The Corleone rule applies: It's not personal, it's business.

I find dpreview to be a handy one-stop reference for specifications of a large number of cameras. That's about all I use it for. But my impression is that it influences a significant number of the camera-buying public.

I still don't quite understand why dpreview is so popular. The overall level of discourse at its forums is abysmally low.

dPreview is an Amazon.com site. It's odd that Amazon allows Phil Askey to rant as he does. He routinely disrespects and acts in a condescending manner to Amazon customers on the site. It is not his site anymore, it belongs to Amazon. If Phil alienates Canon, Olympus, forum visitors and Amazon customers AND reviews trickle out so slowly....why go there? There is very little photographic discussion at that site anyway. Mostly what they call fanboy types are active there.

Mike, right now, the E-3 IS JUST VAPORWARE.
Olympus'(belated) offer was to provide Phil with a "pre-production" camera, which means that there are NO PRODUCTION CAMERAS at this time.
I think that all the hype is just to discourage sales of the D300 and 40D, until Olympus gets its act together (hopefully, sometime next year).
I applaud him for sticking to his guns.

Phil Askey has posted on his forums about the delay in reviews - they're moving and hiring new staff:


I hope that link works.

Well, as already mentioned above... if you remember the Pentax K10D story: announced in Aug 06, and then many good people were busy waiting for the Phil's word till Dec. Great camera, no review.

Now: another (potentially) great camera, no even (p)review... Who is guilty? The manufacturer! Why do not just call Oly a couple of times?

Yes, DPR is changing its facilities and the lab to catch the stream of the new products coming daily. Good luck!

"What I don't get is why DP Review has so much trouble getting reviews out on time. I know they are thorough and want to get things right, but hire some more people, for crying out loud!"

There's a post by Phil in the forums where he says they are currently in the process of relocating their studio which has obviously interrupted the review work. He also said they are indeed hiring more staff.

We'd all like to see more reviews - I would expect to see at least a couple before Christmas and many more in 2008 when the new staff are up to speed.

Regarding the E-3, his complaint wasn't just that he wasn't given a review sample - it was that Olympus stated explicitly that there were NO review samples when clearly there were. His more frequent complaint is towards manufacturers who embargo journalists against releasing official information early then "leak" the information themselves with a nod and a wink.

So many cameras, so little time.

DPreview is very influential in amateur and amateur-pro photo circles, which is the site's primary readership. And for good reason: DPreview features the gold-standard for camera reviews. No other site even comes close to their thoroughness and consistency.

But c'mon, there are far too many new camera models (especially in the DPreview readership's universe) to expect a tiny operation to keep pace with new camera reviews. And let's face it: Olympus is an old-school brand that's made wonderful photographic products. But it's fallen far back in today's market share race. So I suspect that any practical sense of urgency would place the waiting Nikon and Canon models far ahead of anything from Olympus.

But, hey, it causes no real harm, and it's much more fun, to construct conspiracy and revenge theories.

How do you dare to scorn our mighty god Phil Askey? May Askey's wrath fall upon you!

Rob Prins pointed out in reference to DPreview:

"It took them forever to give the mighty Pentax K10 a full review and even then it only earned a cautionary "Highly Recommended (Just)" rating."

This is an example of the main problem with Dpreview's camera reviews. DPreview tends to test cameras at their default settings and places too much weight on out of the camera jpegs. Dpreviews major problem with the K10D was relatively soft out of camera jpegs

Obviously, out of camera jpegs at default settings are very different than the types of images that can be obtained from a camera in the hands of an experienced photographer after processing raw images.

Dpreview sets a very high standard in their reviews which are extremely thorough. They must be extremely time consuming to do. So I find it hard to understand all the sniping. Sure, I wish they would get their reviews done faster. But I appreciate the depth and quality. They seem unbiased enough to me. I'm willing to put up with some of the minor annoyances for the tremendous service they provide -- free, last time I looked. If you are annoyed with the reviews on dpreview, then check out the un-reviews on Popular Photography. If you want to vent your ire, there are better targets.

You're forgetting that DPReview is a UK-based site. Pentax and Olympus marketing in the US are far more capable than the UK branch.

Phil can't review cameras he doesn't have. They didn't send him a production E-510. Pentax UK sent him a K10D long after Pentax USA sent out their review copies. Pentax USA's marketing chief pops up in the DPReview forums and keeps his own blog - can't say the same about any of the UK staff.

Olympus have now promised to give Phil an E-3 to review. If he gets a production copy soon, he's said he'll fast-track the review because it's what he considers a "halo" product. But it's up to Olympus to get the cameras into Phil's hands.

That said, I do find frustrating Phil's requirement that a camera's merits are judged by its default settings. I don't use any of my cameras on their default settings - and for some cameras in particular they become much more capable beasts once you do so.

But if you start fiddling with settings, you're going to have a never-ending flamewar with people who may or may not have a legitimate criticism of the settings you have chosen.

To me the most valuable tests are done by I-R. Their performance tests are more accurate than DPReview's equivalent tests. And I-R comments on how well the images print at sizes from 4x6 to 11x14 and larger. DPReview compares 100% crops. I've owned shitty digicams that produced images that looked pretty foul on screen, esp at larger sizes, but printed well enough that the lab owner asked if I shot with a Leica (I do street, so more than one person has assumed I used a Leica).

To me the ideal review site would have the technical bits handled by I-R and camera usability and image quality done by Markus Hartel.

But, still, there are issues. Most dSLRs test pretty well in the lab. Autofocus times are quick and accurate. Except that I end up doing a lot of my work in low light. And lo! My K10D's autofocus speed goes from 0.2 in decent light to 2 seconds or longer and then cheats by going to infinity.

But, really, in the hands of a competent user, any modern digicam or dSLR can produce pretty decent photos in good light. How well do they perform and how well do they print in light where you need ISO 800 or 3200 or 25600? I-R tell us how well they print, but not how they perform. Anyone else?

Jeff: I myself find it a significant factor that my camera is capable of producing decent jpegs.

It applies to a lot of people in the market: amateurs, myself, journalists I guess as well.

I have a pet theory about product reviews and product consumers. The more two products are alike and the more fit for their purpose they become, the more energy will be expended by their respective devotees in their championing and defense. Windows vs. Mac. Chevy vs. Ford. Canon vs. Nikon vs....

Nowadays they all work pretty damn well. Certainly superior to what consumers of even just a few years ago enjoyed. No current DSLR can possibly be described as "bad". Their fans will argue with great determination and many words, however, about exactly how good they are and just how they might, in one opinion or other, be made even better.

Reviews compare technical minutae between brands... microseconds of shutter lag... just how precise an autofocus system might be... just how many metering segments we might need... comparisons of chronically boring images at scales no mortal would ever contemplate. If one's reputation is besmirched we can and will demand justice. Nothing but high-magnification images of a fraction of a wine-bottle-label at twelve paces can restore our honor.

What any of this has to do with photography escapes me. None of it tells me anything about what I might be able or want to do with one camera/lens/tripod/flash/rechargeable battery. Maybe I'll start a site reviewing nothing but microfibre cloths, lens caps, USB cables and blower brushes. There's enough tribalism about for me to think it might be worth some advertising revenue. "B+W vs. Hoya step-rings, see how they stack up in our latest in-depth report".

So I'm being a little disingenuous, but only a bit. It just seems that for all their determined detail, camera review sites tell us little of what really matters. I happened to find myself in the local shrine to consumer electronics last weekend and idly played with some of the cameras on display, like one does, to stay awake while my wife talked cellphones with a charming young man in a polo-shirt. Olympus DSLRs have never been all that exciting to me, for no reason. Handling a E-510 was quite the surprise. Sweet! How had I missed this? Reminds me of the feel of small 35mm SLRs I grew up with. Lovely handling camera. Best of the current crop I've yet toyed with. Very tempting, if my photo-budget wasn't already overdrawn for this year. What review would have tipped me off to that? The best we ever get from dpreview and their ilk is a dismissive one-liner about the grip material or something.

I've decided to abstain from all the review sites until they start to talk about making interesting pictures and *using* cameras, handling them, living with them, forging meaningful relationships, rather than irrelevent measurements of engineering one-upmanship.

I agree with others that dpreview at times comes off as petulant and unprofessional (threatening the 'Pentax fanbois' with not reviewing their precious K10d when they started clamouring too much). And their reviews have been taking forever of late. However, I don't think that's a great reason for withholding pre-production cameras that can be used for previews.

I read the K10d preview when it first appeared, and based on that I went from not knowing or caring much about Pentax cameras to actively wanting this model. The review didn't really add anything for me. There was lots and lots of emphasis on a feature I don't care that much about and anyway philosophically disagree with Phil's opinion on: the JPG engine. The preview spelled out the features and showed the layout and menu system in great detail. It was the real sales tool for me.

In general I find the (admittedly painstaking) reviews on dpreview.com to be generally unsatisfactory: too much analysis of the size of the number; not enough about the angle of the dangle - if you know what I mean.

Problem with DPReview reviews is that they are inconsistent. One camera has a "problem" and it's a cause for consternation and it earns "(barely) recommended". Another camera has the same "problem" and it's perfectly okay and the camera earns "highly recommended".

As to the depth of the reviews, even with the other stuff they need to be doing, I don't see why they need more than a week for a camera. Okay, take two weeks to be certain. Still, DPR could have been much faster in getting the reviews out.

Besides, their spec sheets are quite often carelessly copied. Case in point is E-3.

According to DPR, E-3 has 3 shots of AE bracketing. Olympus says it has 3/5 shots. Given that E-1 had 3 or 5 shots of AE bracketing...

Or X-sync speed: DPR says it's 1/250 and 1/4000 with FP. Olympus data says it's 1/250 and 1/8000 with FP.

Continuous shooting - DPR says it's 5fps and "RAW: 1 frames maximum". On Olympus site, it's 16 frames for RAW.

I agree with Mike to a large part. Askey's DPReview, anecdotally at least, does not seem interested in reviewing Olympus' products, at least to the same extent it shows interest in reviewing Canikon's. I noticed this 6 years ago in looking for a review of the first ever digital camera I bought, an Olympus C-4040Z (which was a pretty sweet little camera, BTW). It never did get reviewed, primarily because of what I took to be rather petulant behavior on Askey's part...the fact that the body design was a bit clunky, and had not changed basically at all since the C-2020.

I know that he has had to move and reset set up shop, but businesses everywhere have to deal with similar issues, and they don't stop doing business because of it. I for one, still cannot believe that Canon 1DMkIII has not yet been reviewed, especially considering it's been out for at least 5 months, and especially considering all the controversy over it's autofocus issues. For that matter, the 40D has not been reviewed either, and given that it has the same basic AF system that the 1D MkIII has, I am very interested to know whether it has the same AF problems that the 1D MkIII has. And this is a camera that has been selling in volume for some time now.

Anyway, rant aside, I agree with NextSibling wholeheartedly....I am not interested in the rehashing of spec tables that I can look up anywhere...I am much more interested in reviews about what *life* is like with these cameras...how do they perform, day in and day out? In calm seas and rough seas? In the field, during the day and during the night? The whole forging relationships that NextSibling talks about is bang-on the money...that's what we're supposed to be doing our cameras, forging realtionships....and some relationships are more high-maintainence than others. My relationships with my film Oly OM-1s were love affairs....as well as with my pro Canon 1D's...can't say the same about some other cameras I've owned.

The ONLY site that ever influenced me, or my offspring, in a camera buying decision is this one, TOP. I am more interested in what a genuine photographer, as opposed to a reviewer, thinks of a product. So thanks to Mr Johnston I bought a 7D and no 2 son bought a K10D. The 7D I loved in a way I never felt about the Canon 10D it replaced and now it has been replaced with a D80 I still miss certain aspects of it.

I'd much rather they sent you an E-3 instead, Mike - I've never bought anything you've reviewed but whenever I come across a product that you have reviewed, the review suddenly makes a lot of good sense. Plus, you write well, which is always a bonus.

Sorry friends, but I wouldn't buy a camera based on TOP or many other websites. This is not a true review site anyway. It's opinionated verbage.

In reply from this comment from phule:

"I find it very funny that people take reviews so personally. That because site A didn't give the camera you bought glowing reviews you think there is some huge conspiracy/bias on the part of the review site.

Comments that dpreview.com is biased towards one manufacturer or the other are pure nonsense. Such claims are nothing more than immature and childish responses to a /single/ data point."

Just let me tell you that I don't take reviews personally.
After years of using film SLRs, I spent almost two years reading to get information on the new dSLRs, once they arrived to the maturity to my eyes (which is, 10 megapixels at an affordable price). I have read all kinds of stuff, from very good to very bad. I have learned a lot on photography and on websites dealing with photography: I mean it, a lot. And I started to make a clear difference, between places with soul, and places without soul. TOP is probably where I found most soul, if you know what I mean. The Luminous Landscape is other fine example, and Imaging Resource is another.

But coming to the dpreview controversy: they do extensive technical reviews, without meat. You can find every single little bit of details on the camera features, or compare every single pixel with the competition. But there is no soul in all that.

In my search of information for my new dSLR, I went of course to DPReview and I have been reading there many reviews. Many. I had shortlisted two models: the Pentax K10D and the Olympus E510 (whose review never appeared there, thus far, in spite of the huge interest of such model for average photographers). And while reading about the K10D (and by comparing the comments, and the pictures, with other models from the Big Brothers, Canon and Nikon), it was clear to me that objectivity was lacking. But beyond that, I noticed that the reviewer (Phil, I guess) was completely missing the very soul of that particular model.

Just check the K10D review at Imaging Resource. Besides a very complete technical report, they give you the insight that matters (IMO): how this model works in actual hands of photographers, what you can do and what you can't do. They stressed very much a most important point, IMO: the completely fresh, new approach of Pentax when designing the K10D, by including a couple of exposure models where the sensibility of the camera was used as another variable (as opposed to the fixed sensibility of films), that can be modified at every shot.

The comments in Luminous Landscape gave also much importance to the creativiy of those new modes, and the wonderful series of articles written by Carl Weese here in TOP did provide loads of finer details, dealing derectly with what I call the soul of the camera.

But don't misunderstand me: I am not here to promote the Pentax K10D; I just intend to use this model, and its reviews at a few places, to showcase what is IMO the main problem in dpreview (and many other, similar places filled with numbers and comparisons): It's sin is the classic sin of the modern days: analyzing the surface of things in all detail, scrutinizing until the very minor issue, and providing an enthomologist analysis of the product. But missing the core of the issue: the soul of the product.

After reading loads and loads of reviews, I understood which sites were cold reports filled with pixels, noise values, and all kind of technical stuff. And which sites were filled with passion and interest in looking at the real soul of the camera, at its deep nucleus and its meaning, in terms of possibilities for the creative photographer.

To finish, let me tell you an illustration for all this.

Like twenty years ago, when I first had some bucks to spend on serious hi-fi gear (mind you: no internet), I visited all hi-fi shops in my city, only to be informed about the different possibilities. I collected lots of catalogues, and I made myself tables to compare the performances between the different models. At the begining, a lower distortion level meant a lot to me, or the stereo separation.

After a few weeks, I was lucky enough to find a dealer who, after answering all my technical questions, said: "Can I be frank with you, sir? You are missing the point. The numbers say nothing: you have to listen to the product and compare by yourself".

Then he did a comparison, where I heard first what I considered an excellent CD player: a Sony. And then I heard the same song, as played by a Marantz. Then I heard the same song as played by a NAD.

As of today, I have bought at such dealer pretty much all my audio/video equipment. I have an excellent (and not expensive) NAD system, that has worked stunningly well for all these years. And I don't pay attention anymore at numbers, because it is the SOUL of the products what matters to me.

Frankly, I'm not sure how much value reviews have when it comes to DSLRs (or any other serious equipment for that matter). I might be curious as to what Phil thought of the E3, DIII, D40 etc., but I certainly wouldn't base a major spend on his opinion! I would want a lot of opinions, and some hands on experience.

On the other hand, I find DPreview a big help in choosing between point n' shoots - with so many models out there, DPreview is certainly useful for narrowing down the field.

I also wonder if Amazon prefers Phil to concentrate on the lower end of the market - afterall, visitors are much more likely to click n' buy a relatively cheap P&S than they are a pro-spec DSLR ... surely this must be a relatively low sales area for Amazon.


Robert Davis,
"Verbage"? Where did you go to school? http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/verbage.html

Mike J.

DP Review always seemed to show preferential treatment to some manufacturers over others. They decide that a camera will e a "hot seller" and will write a "review" (that is a term I use rather loosely) but a camera like the Fuji S5 Pro doesn't get a review until well over 6 months after it was made available to the public and 10 months after it was announced!

If it doesn't have the words Canon or Nikon on the case, Askey has no desire to look at it.

I'd probably be less inclined to despise the site if they had a proper and unbiased review system but when you compare a Nikon camera with the 35mm f/2 with a Canon camera with the 35mm 1/4, your results are inevitably going to be seriously flawed.

These neo-photo-messiahs like Askey and Scott Kelby should be shoved off a cliff as to allow for some creativity and proper exploration of the digital format.

If you want to see a completely different DPReview from the one many of you are describing, JUST READ THE ARTICLES. Don't look at the porn -- I mean, the forums.

The reviews and comments on press releases are just fantastic work with nary a hint of bias. Even if these people are unprofessional when typing, they are very professional when writing.

And no, I don't think they were biased against the K10D for having iffy out-of-camera JPEGs, any more than they were biased for claiming the XTi had an uncomfortable grip. Both of these are valid complaints, but both of these are still excellent cameras. Even the best can get still better (D300, 40D, S5, etc)

Hi Mike,
I think you are mistaken in thinking that there is some bad feelings between dpreview and Olympus. You mention that they haven't reviewed the E510 which is true but I think that's because they have already reviewed the E410 and they are the same camera minus the image stabilization, it would be a waste of their time really. Also I believe they give fair unbiased reviews, you can find good comments on cameras from any manufacturer. Check the E410 or Pentax K100d for example.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007