Most camera reviewers are not talented photographers. They simply enjoy fiddling with photographic tools. Most photographers on the other hand make pictures, not qualified reviews.
I'm tempted to compare this to music reviewers. Many music reviewers are ex musicians who are not talented enough to make a living out of playing music. Same goes for book reviewers. (There are exceptions from this "rule") Nothing wrong about that. It is just the way it is, and something you should consider while reading a review. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Godfrey DiGiorgi Sent: 16. desember 2006 07:52 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: K10D review online On Dec 15, 2006, at 10:00 PM, Tom C wrote: >> This whole thing is specious nonsense. Who cares what some reviewer/ >> pundit says about the K10D? >> >> Pentax Marketing might, it's their money at stake, but they probably >> didn't soil their kneepads adequately so he didn't bother giving them >> the golden moment. >> >> I sure as hell don't. The camera works great. Fuck the reviewers. >> Sheesh. > > Fine Godfrey. When you produce and publish any kind of > comprehensive review > attempting to scientifically demonstrate the basis for your > opinion, with > comparisons to other brands, then the world and I may believe you > instead. Do you know what credentials Mr. Askey has as the basis of his testing science? or whether he even knows what a photograph is? I can't find anything on the DPReview.com "About Us" or via Google, or any other search tools at my disposal, to tell me that he or his employees have any credentials whatsoever as an equipment testing organization. Nor can I find any references to Phil's photographic experience. Please point me to them if you can find them, I'd like to know. All I see so far is a website with lots of information and tools to attract advertising dollars. A good business, I expect. I don't care to write formal equipment reviews, personally. I'm a photographer: I'd rather spend my time developing my photography. However, I am happy to give you the benefit of my experience using the equipment as it was designed to be used, which I do here. When asked about an opinion or comment, I articulate what I did and why, and invite commentary and other ideas about my statements. > The reason for reviews, even though they can be flawed or biased or > opinionated, is that most common folk don't have the time, > expertise, money, > or desire to go out and buy a representative sample of the products > available and conduct exhaustive tests. "Common folk" are always at the mercy of this big, complicated world due to their lack of wits, or/and they are too lazy to go out and find real information for themselves, or/and they just don't have the resources to take care of themselves. They need/want experts to guide them, to make it easy and secure, to tell them how and why and what. Bollocks. Bullshit like that is why the world is the mess it is today. > Resorting to expletives, is not a sign of high intelligence or a > convincing argument. Have you polished your Mensa badge lately? G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
