Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PaulS
I like reviews that tie in with my own world view (I'm sure I'm not alone  ). For example, I've often found DPR reviews irritating as they are pixel-peeping fixated and gloss over important things like ergonomics or the inherent attractiveness (or not) of the printed result, and focus on things that are mostly not going to be visible to the naked eye. |
Exactly. Personally I think dpreview reviews come from a technically oriented-background person. Look at Reichman's revies and though I see a flaw here and there (an example was the S3 review for dynamic range part of the review), he has had to explain stuff like (direclty from the Lumix L1 field test report):
"I'll digress here for a moment with a comment addressed to those who don't "get" the criticisms that I sometimes make of camera's handing. If one is simply using a camera to take occasional snapshots, then such seemingly small design glitches may seem to get too much attention in my reviews. I make them though because for me a camera is a tool, not a fetish object or occasional toy. When I'm doing photography I do it for hours and days at a time, in every sort of weather. How well, or how poorly controls fall to hand is a critical aspect of how I end up feeling about a camera's suitability as a working companion. This is why I sometimes end up criticizing aspects of some cameras that other reviewers don't. It's because I choose to focus on traits that may not be noticed or even of interest to someone who is evaluating a camera from a different perspective."
This is something that personally dpreview doesn't seem to get.
- Raist