bfitzgerald wrote:One example is this quote:
"We've enjoyed using the SLT cameras we've used so far. Concerns about light-loss, electronic viewfinders and ghosting may have made DSLR purists nervous, but most people who tried using the cameras couldn't help but be impressed. Having light constantly directed to the AF sensor meant the SLTs could offer autofocus both during video shooting and 10 frame-per-second shooting - a combination still unmatched at the consumer end of the market."
Now most of that should be thrown in the bin straight off it's a preview and not a review (so save the personal thoughts for that, stick to the camera)
Once you start putting out dribble like "most people couldn't help but be impressed" who the hell are "most people"??
So did the DPR team go out with various SLT cameras so members of the public could try them and they conveyed their "I'm impressed" thougts to the team? It's the kind of comment that has no place in a preview or a review. As for the last line "combination unmatched" again brochure talk. Stick to the "facts" and the spec, save the personal stuff for the review. Clearly it's going to go "Gold" and we know that even now. They also have an annoying habit of brown nosing Apple products too (they get news, but other makers don't)
I see DPR are now doing "Printer reviews" yet abandoned lens reviews some time ago for some odd reason. I think the site has lost direction in recent years the team has grown quite a bit, but the reviews have become rather stale and uninteresting. The review rate per person working there is also quite poor, with that number of staff they should be doing quite a few more reviews.
Lets break it all down -
"We've enjoyed using the SLT cameras we've used so far."
Sounds like a fact to me. They enjoyed it. Why should they say they didn't if they did? This matches my own experience.
"Concerns about light-loss, electronic viewfinders and ghosting may have made DSLR purists nervous,"
Definitely another fact!
"... but most people who tried using the cameras couldn't help but be impressed."
Highly likely this is a fact as it was my own experience. Remember this is limited users who tried the cameras as opposed to those who stood in a store looking through the viewfinder.
"Having light constantly directed to the AF sensor meant the SLTs could offer autofocus both during video shooting and 10 frame-per-second shooting"
Another fact.
" - a combination still unmatched at the consumer end of the market."
An obvious fact.
bfitzgerald wrote:Now most of that should be thrown in the bin straight off it's a preview and not a review (so save the personal thoughts for that, stick to the camera)
It seems we've entered the realm of semantics here. A preview is generally regarded as assessments made prior to actually having a camera in hand and a review are statements made about actual experience with the camera. Whether it's a mini-review or a full review, they had cameras! It's obvious they were sticking to statements about their actual experiences. So all these stated facts should be thrown in the bin? You can throw them in my bin.
bfitzgerald wrote:Once you start putting out dribble like "most people couldn't help but be impressed" who the hell are "most people"??
Reviewers are not isolated in a vacuum. They have friends and associates that they counteract with and if only six out of ten people were impressed, that would easily fit the the meaning of the term "most people."
bfitzgerald wrote:So did the DPR team go out with various SLT cameras so members of the public could try them and they conveyed their "I'm impressed" thougts to the team?
I doubt that but you are again referred to the above. I also doubt the reviewers were Jedi knights imposing their will on unsuspecting imperial troopers with mind tricks.
bfitzgerald wrote:It's the kind of comment that has no place in a preview or a review.
It's exactly the kind of comment that definitely has a place in a review. It may have no place in a preview but that is because they wouldn't have had cameras to be able to make those kinds of assessments.
bfitzgerald wrote:As for the last line "combination unmatched" again brochure talk.
It was accurate brochure talk. Can you supply another camera in that class that matched it?
Earlier you said -
bfitzgerald wrote:It would be easy you just avoid making any statements or opinions either way.
But then you said -
bfitzgerald wrote:Stick to the "facts" and the spec, save the personal stuff for the review.
I think I'm getting whiplash!
How can you simultaneously not have opinions and personal stuff in a review and at the same time, have it? This is a camera review trial, not a court of law trial!
You said "stick to the 'facts'" and I just conveniently sorted out all the facts for you at the beginning of this post, yet you want all the facts thrown into the dust bin. And so you still have not provided any examples of excuses or false information.
bfitzgerald wrote:I see DPR are now doing "Printer reviews"
I like printer reviews.
Ed