halabar
Member
RIVI1969 said:
Phil is not exactly innocent either. Apparently he was aware of the issues as well, and is "holding" his review while Leica addresses the issues. That's one way to write great reviews, wait until the camera is fixed in version 2!
Read Phil's statement (in his green) at: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0611/06111001leicam8statement.asp
So while others write glowing reviews, others just hold back. Either way we don't get the info needed for early adopters.
AShearer
Established
halabar said:Phil is not exactly innocent either. Apparently he was aware of the issues as well, and is "holding" his review while Leica addresses the issues. That's one way to write great reviews, wait until the camera is fixed in version 2!
Read Phil's statement (in his green) at: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0611/06111001leicam8statement.asp
So while others write glowing reviews, others just hold back. Either way we don't get the info needed for early adopters.
Exactly: I just made this same point in the thread about Michael Riechman. http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31158&page=4
rami G
Established
I must say it is rather shocking, if any reviewer knew, and did not reprt it. Obviously, these people cannot criticize Leica for not treating them as they should treat journalist. A journalist should not care less what a private company wants him to publish and what's not. This is unclearn journalism, to say the least. Leica wants to make money, they did not develop the M8 from humanitarian reasons. Accusing the reviewers for not noticing something that was noticed latter on is one thing, which I find, rather absurd, but not reporting what they knew is a betrayal of the heart of the profession. I hope the ones reporting from Iraq are doing a more reliable work.
Steve L
Established
Well, in their defense, at first it really did seem to be just a firmware finalization issue for white balance....which people could easily expect to be sorted out. It wasn't until we got everyone together on the forums that the multiplicity and depth of the issues emerged.
And can you blame them for not suspecting that it was possible that serious flaws were being intentionally covered up in a flagship Leica product? It is still hard to believe....
And can you blame them for not suspecting that it was possible that serious flaws were being intentionally covered up in a flagship Leica product? It is still hard to believe....
halabar
Member
Well, perhaps the end result of this is that we are all a bit wiser regarding the relation of these reviewers and the camera companies. We've learned to take their reviews with a grain of salt, and also that camera companies may request that a reviewer not talk about certain "problems". Other reviews might "hold off" until things are OK, (while you are going ahead and ordering a hot camera).
The very unfortunate thing is that some of you paid for the lesson by getting an expensive camera you are not happy with. I hope that all of you get this issue resolved to your satisfaction, and don't have to "settle" for anything, as you shouldn't have to with a $5k camera.
The very unfortunate thing is that some of you paid for the lesson by getting an expensive camera you are not happy with. I hope that all of you get this issue resolved to your satisfaction, and don't have to "settle" for anything, as you shouldn't have to with a $5k camera.
rami G
Established
btw, so far, from what I have understood so far, Sean is the only reviewer that did not intentionally colaborated with Leica in misleading potential buyers. Maybe I missed something or maybe I don't know something, but the two other cases, one, in which a reviewer left out crucial findings, the other, when a reviewer delayed a review for a camera that is already in the stores as a result of Leica's request, are far more bothering than the question whether Sean's initial test did not reveal (to him) explicitly a limitation of the camera. From my working with different cameras (20D, 5D, R-D1, slr/c D1) any reivew I ever read leaves out important things that come up in the hands of a real world user.
roblumba
Established
Impatience again
Impatience again
I don't understand where people figure that Phill is holding back the information. It seems more reasonable that he had either not started or not finished the review and decided to wait until Leica finishes their resolution before finishing his review. Make sense to me. Remember the old lesson, ASSUME makes an ASS out of U and ME. It's a silly lesson with so many applications.
Impatience again
I don't understand where people figure that Phill is holding back the information. It seems more reasonable that he had either not started or not finished the review and decided to wait until Leica finishes their resolution before finishing his review. Make sense to me. Remember the old lesson, ASSUME makes an ASS out of U and ME. It's a silly lesson with so many applications.
rami G
Established
roblumba said:
Note phil's comment: Phil:" Note that we have been working closely with Leica on this, obviously it made sense for us to delay our review until these issues have been resolved."
what is it here? KGB? they have been "working closely with Leica"?!! I don't know what about you, I don't like that statements- they are supposed to have some independence from the manufacturers- we are talking about a camera that is in the stores already- they should better have some dignity in front of their audiance. I wasn't assuming anything (if you were referring to my comment).
roblumba
Established
Reading into it
Reading into it
I think it's funny how people come up with conspiracy theories from "working closely with Leica". Who knows what that means except that he called them and talked to them about this and asked many questions and perhaps got some answers. I don't see how you can come up with a conspiracy from those words unless Phill has a history of acting in this manner.
Reading into it
I think it's funny how people come up with conspiracy theories from "working closely with Leica". Who knows what that means except that he called them and talked to them about this and asked many questions and perhaps got some answers. I don't see how you can come up with a conspiracy from those words unless Phill has a history of acting in this manner.
rami G
Established
Well, I don't think there was any conspiracy. I respect a lot all of these reviewers. I don't believe, and never did, that any of these people gained a penny from that thing. I concern by something different, which is, that the sources of information in this, new, internet era are loosing what is one of the main standards that formed what is called "journalism" which is the independence of the source of information from the subject of information and from the interests of the subject, in particular, when the subject is a financial organization or a politician. Is it so difficult to understand? is there anything of that that you think I am wrong about? People have to be reminded of their responsibilities once they are in a position of power as Phil is. His power results from the facts that his words, and his lack of words, have very significant implication regarding how people spend their money. If this is simply a mistake, that's fine, everybody should learn from it. But if these people don't want to understand that even once they have been reminded, then it is really something we should all be aware of. They pretend to give the best information available. Delaying a review because a camera, which is alreayd sold in stores, and for 5000$ is slightly irresponsible, i.e. a case in which someone fails to reslize his responsibilities. Is it so difficult to understand?
galavanter
Established
In My Humble Opinion He Does
In My Humble Opinion He Does
I have been banned twice from dpreview. I first discovered the site and joined sometime prior to 2000 when looking for my first digital camera, a 2mp Canon Elph.
Close to a year ago, an already notoriously trollish member alluded to masturbation when someone posted a picture of a pretty girl on a thread about high resolution photographs. I attacked him, complained to dpreview, finally starting a thread about it which resulted in my banning (suicide by Phil Askey I like to call it). The other member notes in his signature still today that he is a dpreview "supporter". I take this to mean financial.
A couple of months ago, reading up on all the hype about the Pentax K10D, I went to Pentax's American site to see some newly posted sample pics. One was a mannequin head, a caricature of a ridiculously happy smiling black man with giant teeth and big red lips. My immediate and sincere reaction was that Black African Americans would not be overjoyed when viewing this sample photo.
I rejoined dpreview and started a thread entitled, "Are Pentax K10D Sample Photos Racially Insensitive?" I only posed a question, suggesting that from a marketing point of view, Pentax could have chosen many other photos, ones that would not possibly alienate a significant percentage of their American market.
Well as you might imagine, the thread turned into a rather controversial one. I was called many things and although there were some intelligent, thoughtful responses, including one from a Pentax marketing person/photographer, people seemed to come out of the woodwork to type long tirades against me, a few in broken English.
Finally an old redneck from Texas made a thinly veiled personal threat to me. I simply responded with a factual retort, concerning a heinous hate crime that took place in Texas 1998, the murder of James Byrd Jr. He was dragged behind a pick up truck with a chain until his head came off. A rather serious piece of evidence that racism still exists in our society.
I was immediately banned again. This thread was now close to a hundred posts long, and in a few more days it too disappeared entirely from the history books of dpreview. But go to Phil Askeys site today, and you will find an advertisement for the new Pentax K10D, linking you to the very same American Pentax website. The offensive pic (to me) has finally been removed and replaced with full sized images of a pretty girl, one of my marketing suggestions to Pentax.
Phil Askey to me is a talented guy with a very well designed and popular website that I've read may be the most popular digital photography site in the world. But like many of his ilk, he has no interest in changing that world, only in maintaining the status quo and thereby his own financial success.
Jim
In My Humble Opinion He Does
roblumba said:
I have been banned twice from dpreview. I first discovered the site and joined sometime prior to 2000 when looking for my first digital camera, a 2mp Canon Elph.
Close to a year ago, an already notoriously trollish member alluded to masturbation when someone posted a picture of a pretty girl on a thread about high resolution photographs. I attacked him, complained to dpreview, finally starting a thread about it which resulted in my banning (suicide by Phil Askey I like to call it). The other member notes in his signature still today that he is a dpreview "supporter". I take this to mean financial.
A couple of months ago, reading up on all the hype about the Pentax K10D, I went to Pentax's American site to see some newly posted sample pics. One was a mannequin head, a caricature of a ridiculously happy smiling black man with giant teeth and big red lips. My immediate and sincere reaction was that Black African Americans would not be overjoyed when viewing this sample photo.
I rejoined dpreview and started a thread entitled, "Are Pentax K10D Sample Photos Racially Insensitive?" I only posed a question, suggesting that from a marketing point of view, Pentax could have chosen many other photos, ones that would not possibly alienate a significant percentage of their American market.
Well as you might imagine, the thread turned into a rather controversial one. I was called many things and although there were some intelligent, thoughtful responses, including one from a Pentax marketing person/photographer, people seemed to come out of the woodwork to type long tirades against me, a few in broken English.
Finally an old redneck from Texas made a thinly veiled personal threat to me. I simply responded with a factual retort, concerning a heinous hate crime that took place in Texas 1998, the murder of James Byrd Jr. He was dragged behind a pick up truck with a chain until his head came off. A rather serious piece of evidence that racism still exists in our society.
I was immediately banned again. This thread was now close to a hundred posts long, and in a few more days it too disappeared entirely from the history books of dpreview. But go to Phil Askeys site today, and you will find an advertisement for the new Pentax K10D, linking you to the very same American Pentax website. The offensive pic (to me) has finally been removed and replaced with full sized images of a pretty girl, one of my marketing suggestions to Pentax.
Phil Askey to me is a talented guy with a very well designed and popular website that I've read may be the most popular digital photography site in the world. But like many of his ilk, he has no interest in changing that world, only in maintaining the status quo and thereby his own financial success.
Jim
Last edited:
RIVI1969
Established
Halabar, you are right and I take back what I said. Of course if DP release his full review with the camera as it is right now maybe it would get an "ABOVE AVERAGE" at the most. I really want to know what Phil has to say about noise because for him it is a major issue all the time, and after seen the pictures from Sean Reid... well, I am very happy I get a Nikon D80 instead; for 1/4 of the price it performs perfectly and delivers beautiful images without any purple casts and almost noiseless up to ISO 1000... just like my RD1 but with bigger files.
roblumba
Established
Reviews vs. News
Reviews vs. News
DPreview does have news bits that are shown on the front page. His reviews are quite a bit different. It seems like Phill usually takes his time to release the full reviews of a camera and it doesn't suprise me that he cooperates with Leica during this difficulty.
I agree that news should provide a checks and balances type of atmosphere. In our day an age a lot of news is just entertainment. I know some people that think American news is a joke. So often it's just sensationalistic entertainment. There's some good information there, but I tend to agree with them.
I don't have my career hanging on the line for photography news, so I'm not in a difficulty position as some of you. Perhaps Phil thinks he's just providing casual entertaining information for a bunch prosumers like me. I don't know the politics either, but sound like there's plenty.
You know the term, "don't burn your bridges". It's very wise in the world of politics, cause if their not your allies, they are likely your enemy. Seems like there's an awful lot of burning going on. Then again, you can't satisfy everyone all the time.
Okay, enough cliches. I'm going to go shoot some photos.
Reviews vs. News
DPreview does have news bits that are shown on the front page. His reviews are quite a bit different. It seems like Phill usually takes his time to release the full reviews of a camera and it doesn't suprise me that he cooperates with Leica during this difficulty.
I agree that news should provide a checks and balances type of atmosphere. In our day an age a lot of news is just entertainment. I know some people that think American news is a joke. So often it's just sensationalistic entertainment. There's some good information there, but I tend to agree with them.
I don't have my career hanging on the line for photography news, so I'm not in a difficulty position as some of you. Perhaps Phil thinks he's just providing casual entertaining information for a bunch prosumers like me. I don't know the politics either, but sound like there's plenty.
You know the term, "don't burn your bridges". It's very wise in the world of politics, cause if their not your allies, they are likely your enemy. Seems like there's an awful lot of burning going on. Then again, you can't satisfy everyone all the time.
Okay, enough cliches. I'm going to go shoot some photos.