This site's product reviews

  [DELETED] 16:12 25 Oct 2003

Is there some cunning reason why this site's review of digital cameras is different from the November and December issues of the magazine?

The Olympus MJU 300 has topped the site's 'beginner's digicam' reviews for a number of months while the Kodak Easyshare DX 6440 is top of the November and December issues of the magazine.

Or is someone sleeping on the job?

I'm interested in purchasing a camera in the price range of these two.

  [DELETED] 22:46 04 Nov 2003

Obviously no reason and no interest either!

Close now.

  Stuartli 09:24 05 Nov 2003

No one is sleeping on the job - as new products arrive the older ones get pushed further down the list as the latest models prove superior.

It's what's known as progress.

  [DELETED] 09:50 05 Nov 2003


Got it in one.

Guy (Online Ed)

  [DELETED] 21:06 05 Nov 2003

Stuartli and Guy

I do believe that both of you are missing the point. Most of us support progress but neither of you have explained why this site's camera review was at least two month's behind the monthly magazines.

And I thought I had closed this thread. Ah well.

  [DELETED] 21:44 05 Nov 2003

You have to tick the resolved box to close this thread

  [DELETED] 22:39 05 Nov 2003

I give credit that PCA mag and this site both list items in order of merit, which is something. But I criticise that reviewers of equipment accept without question all manufacturers' claims/specs; also that digital cameras are given undue emphasis on pixel count against their quality of optics, especially
at full zoom.
I know it must be an effort for reviewers to keep up-to-date, but for example the Visioneer 9020 scanner, currently no.2, has been replaced by model 9320, available in USA August (150 dollars+ tax)and now in Germany. It has a much higher spec than the 9020, and this site's present review should at least give warning of the successor.
My main grumble about reviews generally is the unquestioned acceptance of advertisers' spin.

  [DELETED] 01:51 06 Nov 2003


  Stuartli 08:45 06 Nov 2003

Your criticism of reviewers in claiming that they "accept without question all manufacturers' claims/specs" is completely without foundation and could be considered a case of libel.

As for quality of optics etc, no two lenses are exactly the same, nor ever could be, in their quality, no matter what the focal length or zoom setting.

As for pixel count and optics quality, the two go together - a 3MP camera should produce more detailed resolution than a 2MP verison, even using the same lens design.

A further point is that PCA rates only the products it tests in merit order - there are many other models that are never mentioned, no doubt due to the sheer range available and regular introduction of new ranges.

So it is merely a short term guide and there may well be superior models on the market. That's why you have to check all avenues before making a decision on a purchase.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Microsoft Surface Book 2 15in review

Iglooghost's hyper new music video gives a mutant take on Monument Valley

The best Amazon Prime Day Apple deals 2018

Comment ajouter de la musique à une présentation Google Slides ?