Olympus shafts Dpreview!

Discussion in 'Olympus' started by RichA, Oct 16, 2007.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Guess they saw the Canon bias too?


    UPDATE: Phil: Here we are at one minute past embargo and despite being
    told very clearly that there were no cameras available for preview we
    see at least one other site with a hands-on preview, make of that what
    you will.
    RichA, Oct 16, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. RichA

    Charlie Self Guest

    If Olympus did that on purpose, they might find they bit off a good
    chunk of their own nose, your blather notwithstanding.
    Charlie Self, Oct 17, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Dpreview's problem is the same as some old photographers, they are too
    myopic concerning some aspects of cameras and this effects their
    review process which unfortunately, is often opinion-influenced. This
    hits Olympus reviews because Olympus tends to be forward-thinking an
    innovative, bringing out products with benefits that are not yet fully
    RichA, Oct 17, 2007
  4. "Frankly if Olympus carry on in the way they have for the last month or so
    you'll be lucky to see a review here."

    Phil Askey
    Editor, dpreview.com

    Yvon Travailler, Oct 17, 2007
  5. Would you give a preview camera to a site where you felt you would get an
    unfair review?

    If D P Review fails to review the camera, whatever sulks are now in
    effect, they are failing their readers.

    David J Taylor, Oct 17, 2007
  6. "David J Taylor" <-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> a
    écrit dans le message de
    did they ever do that ? If your answer is yes, can you tell us what are
    those unfair reviews ?

    Do you own a Olympus ?

    I prefer to believe (like many others) that the E-3 is a piece of shit and
    Olympus know it will get a bad review from any professionnals reviewers.

    They prefer to have no serious reviews and let the fanboys jump on the new
    Yvon Travailler, Oct 17, 2007
  7. RichA

    Doug Jewell Guest

    Obviously I have yet to see an E3, but at one stage I had an E1 through work
    and it was an exceptionally good camera, and in some ways before it's time.
    Unfortunately I think they kept it out too long, and by the time it went EOL
    it was very dated. Unfortunately the consumer E300 that followed on from the
    E1 was a POS.
    I'm not convinced any review on dpreview would be a fair review. They show a
    clear bias toward Canon, which stands out like dog-balls (seems only Canon
    fanboi's don't see it). There was recent discussion about a sony vs ixus
    review on dpreview. The Sony images were sharper, had more detail, less
    noise, yet dpreview initially claimed they were worse than the Canon. After
    being taken to task over it, they modified the text to say they were
    basically equal.
    Doug Jewell, Oct 17, 2007
  8. so your an Olympus fanboy who have 1 exemple to give ? lol
    Yvon Travailler, Oct 17, 2007
  9. RichA

    Pete D Guest

    I am no Olympus fan but what Doug says about the Sony v Canon review is
    completely true, I was quite amazed by the obvious bias. I have taken Phil
    to task over other reviews and info that he just leaves off the list of
    features to make cameras look worse than they should be, he is simply
    dishonest and as Doug says only a Canon Fanboi would not see this. His
    answer I guess is that the review is what he sees as the truth.


    Pete D, Oct 17, 2007
  10. RichA

    Doug Jewell Guest

    I am no olympus fanboy. I wouldn't buy one myself because I don't see a
    future in the 4/3 system and it will always be 1 step behind APS for noise
    and/or resolution. But a few years back I had an E1 provided at work and
    it was exceptionally good. It was replaced by an E300 and it was a POS. With
    what I've seen of the E330, E500, E510 and E410 since, they have also failed
    to impress me. The E3 could be good, but the 4/3 sensor will always put it
    behind the 8-ball.
    To be honest, I'd be surprised if the E3 is as good as a similar priced
    current model Canon or Nikon. But the fact remains, it is unlikely to get a
    fair review on dpreview. Dpreview's pro-canon bias is well-known.
    Doug Jewell, Oct 17, 2007
  11. Every serious reviewer would take a device, not offered from the
    manufacturer, but as sold in any of the stores.

    That's not possible for pre-reviews, while it is standard practice for
    unbiased and independent reviewers.

    I don't know whether Phil does take cameras out of the ordinary Amazon
    stock - for most less important reviewer it's hardly possible to buy that
    many cameras.

    - Martin
    Martin Trautmann, Oct 17, 2007
  12. Yvon Travailler wrote:
    I don't know about "unfair", but I've never seen a bad review. The
    average rating is not "average", so why is that?
    Time will tell, I suppose. I think the general level of information in D
    P Review is good, so I hope they do choose to review the E3.

    David J Taylor, Oct 17, 2007
  13. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Spoken like a clueless Canon owner slighted by the obvioius BIAS
    pointed out concerning that review in Dpreview.
    RichA, Oct 17, 2007
  14. from what I know (read it from a Phil's post), they all send him a camera
    for his tests and he is sending all them back after the review.
    Yvon Travailler, Oct 17, 2007
  15. "David J Taylor" <-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> a
    écrit dans le message de
    they are many threads about this, just do a search or ask again. According
    to them, they dont review "below average" camera.

    Thats kind of funny
    Yvon Travailler, Oct 17, 2007
  16. It was a rhetorical question. I find it funny as well, because until
    you've done the tests, how do you know the camera is "below average"? <G>

    David J Taylor, Oct 17, 2007
  17. RichA

    Charlie Self Guest

    Nonsense. If they can't get a camera to review because Olympus has a
    hair across, that's not DPReview's fault. And giving cameras to any
    place that gives reviews is taking a chance on either an unfair
    review, or one that misses some points. I tested woodworking tools for
    magazines for a long time. Some companies where happy, some weren't.
    Any of them that wanted their names in the article supplied tools for
    testing. If they didn't, they got ignored. There's simply no other way
    to do it when you're testing tools that are in what is now the mid-
    range DSLR price category, say $1,000 up to about $2,000, plus
    shipping and handling.
    Charlie Self, Oct 17, 2007
  18. "David J Taylor" <-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> a
    écrit dans le message de
    I bitched 2 or 3 times about the fact that there is not camera below
    average. And most dpreview members didnt not agree with me. The word
    average means nothing (or bottom low) on dpreview.

    I asked someone in another post in this thread to give me 1 example of an
    unfair review, Ill give you a real one:

    FZ50 with a Highly Recommended, why do you think ? Panasonic are one (or
    was) one of the biggest advertiser on dpreview.com.

    From Simon conclusion:
    a.. Noise reduction produces visible artefacts and loss of low contrast
    detail even at low ISO (and noise if you don't use NR) if viewed at 100%
    (actual pixels)
    a.. ISO 400 and above very soft and smeary due to excessive NR
    a.. Bleeding of colors (particularly reds) at high ISOs (excessive chroma
    sub sampling)

    Its a camera god damn it and it gives crappy IQ, how come it gets Highly
    Recommended ?????

    There is noise at ISO 80 with this camera ! lol.

    Again from Simom: "
    And so what we have is a camera that stretches its sensor to almost breaking
    point and compensates for the lack of sensitivity in anything but the
    brightest conditions by using excessive noise reduction. The FZ50 is an
    excellent 5 or 6MP camera, but a rather less impressive 10MP camera. Is this
    a problem? Probably not - by the time the huge files have been shrunk down
    for printing or viewing on-screen they look fantastic, and the handling and
    features are quite simply peerless. But do not, for a minute, think that the
    10 million pixels you're getting with the FZ50 bear anything but a passing
    resemblance to the 10 million pixel images you'll get from a good SLR once
    you get above ISO 100, or once light levels start to drop.

    The FZ50 - at around $570 - sits halfway between the likes of the Canon S3
    IS (currently about $370) and a digital SLR kit with lenses covering a
    similar range (at least $1000 - more if you want quality lenses, a lot more
    if you want image stabilization). For the serious user wanting more than the
    other super zooms can offer (particularly in terms of handling and
    photographic features) it offers a real alternative to lugging round a
    larger, heavier camera and a couple of lenses. And not actually being an SLR
    you get the advantages of live preview on a tilting screen, movie mode, no
    dust on the sensor and so on. Of course this has to be countered with the
    fact that the SLR will give you immeasurably better high ISO performance, a
    better viewfinder and the versatility of interchangeable lenses. But them's
    the choices we make."


    ITS A CAMERA , IQ is suppose to be important !
    Yvon Travailler, Oct 18, 2007
  19. "Charlie Self" <> a écrit dans le message de
    Nonsense. If they can't get a camera to review because Olympus has a
    hair across, that's not DPReview's fault.

    They could do like Photozone, get the hardware by themselves. Phil could
    started the review saying that Olympus refused to sent him a E-3.
    Yvon Travailler, Oct 18, 2007
  20. Can you please provide an example?
    â–€Slack, Oct 18, 2007
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.