I've found few sites or magazines that did not exhibit a great amount
of a priori bias. Whether Canon/Nikon are funding them or otherwise
have a "nudge-nudge-wink-wink" relationship with them is irrelevant
to me. The fact is that they sometimes present good data and then
draw absurd conclusions from it, with even more absurd explanations
as to why those conclusions were drawn.
So what else is new? Consumer Reports, which does try to present
objectively, is just a bad at reviewing and making recommendations as
the biased sites. Them through an utterly utilitarian attitude which
places the "more for less" aphorism at the top of their value chain.
The only way to really get to know what a particular camera can do is
to own it, use it, work with it.
Godfrey
On Aug 23, 2005, at 11:48 PM, Peter Smekal wrote:
Very interesting. Are there no really independent review sites?
Peter
Youthinks? I wish it were common knowledge that sites like
DPReview are
partly owned (or at least, in some cases, heavily sponsored by)
Canon.
Alas, more and more people are duped every day by such sites.
John Celio
--
http://www.neovenator.com
AIM: Neopifex
"Hey, I'm an artist. I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm
making a
statement."
