Olympus shafts Dpreview!

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

  1. Ill take a look at that review tonite.

    I am currently shooting with a Pentax K10D but I love Canon and Nikon a lot
    more than Pentax.

    I used to shoot Canon before (and Nikon before Canon) and Ill probably go
    back to Canon in 2008 (depends of the D300).

    You cant say Im a fanboy since I switched 2 times (Nikon, Canon , Pentax)
    in 4 years. Beeing honest to myself, Canon is the worst company of all 3,
    but it gaves me the best picture for my money.

    Picture quality, the K10D, in daylight with a non moving subject is hard to
    beat if you shoot raw. For the rest (low light, sports, kids, built in
    flash, jpg), go with Canon.

    Ill never try a 4/3 camera and Ill never try a Sony.

    I did my own tests, I had a lot of fun and now Ill choose between Canon and
    Nikon as soon as the D300 comes out.

    Hope this will be my last move for years.
    Yvon Travailler, Oct 18, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. totally agree, 4/3 is dead for me.
    Yvon Travailler, Oct 18, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. Yet they did a good review on the Pentax K10D, Go figure?
    Not Disclosed, Oct 18, 2007
  4. That's what I know from previews and how it did it before. I don't know
    whether he still does so for regular cameras - and I feel it is a bad
    idea to do so, while a manufacturer might provide a tuned ofr selected
    model where ordinary series may have a wider ranger of quality
    Martin Trautmann, Oct 18, 2007
  5. Yvon Travailler wrote:

    Yes image quality is important, however it is but one of the factors about
    a camera. For different people, IQ may rate as more or less important.
    In the case of the superzoom ZLR cameras, with a small sensor, of course
    the IQ will be less than in a DSLR, but the convenience of having
    everything in one package may outweigh that. Absolute IQ may be less
    important to a different user. Equally, the question as to how the small
    sensor is handled will differ between cameras - some may give a sharper
    but noisier image, others a less sharp but lower visible noise image.

    I think that there are two aspects to a review - a factual comparison of a
    camera with its peers, and a subjective rating which will depend on the
    reviewer and their own preferences. If you know who the reviewer is, over
    a period of time you may learn whether your preferences agree with theirs,
    and therefore learn how to interpret their opinions better!

    Ratings like "bad", "average" and "good" imply objective values to me.
    "Recommended" and "not recommended" imply subjective values.
    Unfortunately, DP Review mixes these.

    David J Taylor, Oct 18, 2007
  6. Charlie Self wrote:
    They should be purchasing the camera - not relying on what a manufacturer
    chooses to send. Or if they use a manufacturer-supplied sample, clearly
    identify it as such.

    David J Taylor, Oct 18, 2007
  7. RichA

    Charlie Self Guest

    That business model doesn't work, at least not to the point it
    attracts many people, especially in a publication that started like
    this one. AFAIK, Consumer Reports is the only test magazine in the
    U.S. that buys its own gear to test. And CR is a paid for magazine
    through its membership.

    I think the assumption the publishers make is that the public is
    intelligent enough to realize they don't buy dozens of cameras/cars/
    you name it each year. It is stated throughout the site that such-and-
    such a maker is going to be late supplying a camera, or got one in
    early, or something similar. Most of us are able to deduce from that
    that DPReview didn't buy the cameras. If this came as a shock to you,
    I'm sorry to hear it.
    Charlie Self, Oct 18, 2007
  8. No, of course I know that's how D P Review works, simply on reflection I'm
    not 100% happy that specially tweaked models of the cameras may be what is
    being supplied by [some] manufacturers. It certainly questions their
    status as a truly independent reviewer, but perhaps they don't claim that,

    It does remind us that all these reviews and tests need to be taken with a
    punch of salt, and hence the value of true end-user experience!

    David J Taylor, Oct 18, 2007
  9. That would be the same "Canon bias" that made Canon do exactly the same
    thing with the Canon 1DMkIII camera? There is a difference between
    policy and bias.
    Canon were a little more effective - they didn't even provide
    pre-embargo information on their camera to DPR, but other review sites
    even had samples in their hands.

    From 22nd February 2007:

    "Phil: As has become Canon's approach we had no information on this
    camera before embargo, this lack of trust they show with their most
    important (and reliable) publications only continues to damage their
    image within the industry. "

    So much for a pro-Canon bias - they didn't offer him information on the
    camera at all and when he now implements a similar response with Olympus
    (ie. refusal to review, EVER) it will be as a matter of policy, not
    Kennedy McEwen, Oct 18, 2007
  10. RichA

    RichA Guest

    You do realize that if there is no Canon bias, this brings the
    credibility of their reviewers into an even harsher light? It's not
    that they intentionally skew review comments, they simply can't tell a
    good image from a bad one, as evidenced by that Canon-Sony comparison.
    RichA, Oct 18, 2007
  11. RichA wrote:
    I think that a "good" image is a subjective, and not an objective,
    judgement. Some people may prefer brighter colours, less noise, greater
    sharpness etc. etc. and rate these qualities differently when judging.

    David J Taylor, Oct 18, 2007
  12. No, I don't realise or even agree with that. A "review" is precisely
    that, one individual's SUBJECTIVE assessment of the product at a
    specific time and under a usually unknown set of conditions.

    Your "evidence" for starting this thread was that Olympus withheld
    sample product from DPR as some sort of discrimination for that alleged
    bias. The fact is that others, including Canon themselves, have done
    the same or worse and have elicited the same response from DPR.

    Your "evidence" certainly does not indicate a bias or suggest that any
    company is responding to such bias.

    In short, your "evidence" is, like so much of your output, sheer and
    utter drivel.
    Kennedy McEwen, Oct 18, 2007
  13. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Nonsense. A review is a set of specific TESTS common to all reviews
    that shows something about a camera. If those tests are done
    precisely, then it is easy to compare one camera to another and
    subjectivity never enters into it.
    RichA, Oct 19, 2007
  14. RichA

    RichA Guest

    I don't care what people prefer, they may like getting urinated on.
    What I care about is how a specific camera behaves and how it compares
    under the exact conditions to another camera.
    Testing is supposed to be scientific, not some alchemic nonsense.
    RichA, Oct 19, 2007
  15. If it were so then all reviews would, by definition, agree.

    They DON'T!


    Once again, your feeble baiting game has reached its end. Your case is
    lost because your evidence is flawed.

    Get back under your little bridge, baby troll.
    Kennedy McEwen, Oct 19, 2007
  16. RichA

    irwell Guest

    If they DON'T then the test have not been done properly by
    one of the testing agents..
    irwell, Oct 19, 2007
  17. RichA

    Pete D Guest

    Example of what?
    Pete D, Oct 19, 2007
  18. RichA

    Pete D Guest

    Almost, he made a couple of comments about the K10D that still make people
    wonder how bad it is not how good it is, like a "jpegs a little soft at
    standard settings", well gosh and look at all that detail preserved and his
    "just" comment was just plain stupid.

    I have taken some jpeg shots with the k10D that are just amazingly sharp.
    Pete D, Oct 19, 2007
  19. Richard,

    Testing where numbers are the result - yes. Comparing one image with
    another - no. But the numbers presented on D P Review (or other sites)
    don't tell the whole story.

    For example, you really want to know if sensor A or sensor B is better,
    but the camera's built-in processing differs, one smoothing noise more
    than another. Unless you remove the effect of that in-camera processing,
    you can't compare the sensors (to know which camera has the better
    low-light performance.

    Of course, there's no reason why you can't look at the images as presented
    and make your own judgment - if you believe those images to be truly
    representative of how you would use the camera.

    Unfortunately, the reviews we read have a subjective element as well as
    the objective one. Take from them what suits your needs.

    David J Taylor, Oct 19, 2007
  20. Pete D wrote:
    But if the same picture was taken by several camera brands, used at their
    "standard settings", and the JPEG from one camera looked a little soft
    compared with the others, the reviewers comment would be completely
    justified. Equally, you may be completely happy with the software, less
    sharpened, image, as being kinder on the eye for extended or repeated

    David J Taylor, Oct 19, 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.