cputeq
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.3 #12 · The Best Mirrorless Cameras According to 30 Experts | |
millsart wrote:
Well....given that every automotive magazine's principle ad revenue comes from auto manufacturers, and your simply not going to pan a Chevy when Chevrolet is buying several full page ads in every issue, the resulting conclusions could be said to be a bit worthless.
Same goes for camera magazines et al., your simply not going to see too much criticism for lets say a Sigma lens when on the adjoining page there is a full page Sigma ad.
Heck, even when it comes to web reviews of camera gear, which likely don't have the likes of Canikon advertising, you still have the issue of reviewers getting flown to destinations to try out new gear, and certainly being the first to handle products helps web traffic.
Is it a conidence that guys like Steve Huff who simply rave about Sony and Olympus offerings get invited to Ireland, having Sony hand deliver stuff to his house etc, but then Fuji, who he doesn't seem to like (not saying his opinion is wrong on the matter mind you) doesn't seem to give him anything ?
Whats a reviewer to do ? Pay for every item out of pocket via Lens Rentals etc and be 100% honest, but also not get to review something until well after its been shipping, OR, play the game and get to go to California on Sony's dime and be the first person on the net to post a review ?...Show more →
That's one way to look at it, and sure, some people are paid shills, we all know that.
However, not everyone is like that. I think it was MaximumPC magazine (but maybe not, I can't remember) that once actually addressed these same accusations -- they couldn't vouch for other publications, but this magazine said they avoid this by completely separate departments. The advertising department was totally separate from the editorial department, and so the editorial department wrote what it wanted to write.
Now, does this mean the editorial department has NO interaction with the vendors? No, and it would be foolish to write about products in that sort of vacuum. Often times, a writer will give the vendor the courtesy of calling them if a product just isn't performing up to par (aka, it's going to get slammed in the review) and the vendor might even ask them to delay the review while they investigate -- this doesn't make the writer "bought" by any company.
And what of these crazy trips these photographers get to go on, to test out new gear? One can look at it from the point of the vendor "buying" opinions, and perhaps with some writers, this is the case.
But I think many people realize the vendor wants to show off a nice camera (or camera/lens) in a nice, picturesque setting -- what better way to get the hype machine rolling (and sales flowing) than inviting some talent to a pretty location for shots from everyone?
As for Steve Huff - Yes, he's a hype machine, but that doesn't mean everything he says has no value -- that's the point I was trying to make in my response above. It's up to the reader to decide what they value, and from whom.
As far as Huff specifically, he's written on numerous occasions that he only reviews the stuff he likes. He's openly panned Fuji multiple times, but gave the XT1 pretty high marks. If he WAS a shill, you'd imagine he'd sing the praises of all the big manufacturers, no?
|
And judging by the existence of so many gear comparisons, so do many others.