gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
I'm sorry, but given how affiliate relationships between vendors and individuals, etc. work, this doesn't really make a lot of sense.
From a purely practical point of view, the best thing that a general reviewer whose only goal is more affiliate sales can do is (mostly) super-positive "this will change your life!" reviews that get readers hyped up and convinced they need to buy that new thing. The shorter the turn-around from today's new thing to the next new thing, the better!
One doesn't get the affiliate sales spiff by persuading people to not buy things.
Along these lines, as you can probably see, from this particular perspective it also makes a lot of financial sense to persuade readers/viewers that not only is the new thing way better... but that the most expensive new thing is way, way better than the older, less expensive one they already own. So, while that XT4 was life-changing a couple of years ago, NOW you really, really need to get the XH2! Until the XT5 arrives, at which point it will be a better deal. ;-)
Again from a purely monetary affiliate perspective, the idea is to get people to buy _anything_ through your links — the camera, the lenses, leather cases, UV filters, tripods, "thumb rests," software, the occasional laptop or tablet, you name it.
The way this works is (as you point out) not really a secret. Basically, when you buy through a link on a participating website, the website or other provider gets a percentage of the sale. (I have a couple of affiliate relationships on my site, though I no longer push them. My recollection is that it is about a 3% rate in most cases.)
In fact, FM (and every discussion site I know of) also participates in these relationships.
Some folks act like this is somehow unethical or that the sites should not get any revenue. While it is possible to use the affiliate relationships in ways that are ethically questionable (we can locate examples pretty easily), in most cases the affiliates are not acting in unethical ways. In fact, some of them are the very individuals and websites we rely on for reviews and articles and other resources. If you like what they/we do... then it supports their ability to continue doing this.
And there are real costs to providing reviews and articles and so forth. Articles don't write themselves. Hosting companies require payment. Knowledge and perspectives have value. If your favorite internet site or person offers useful information that helps you make purchase decisions or become a better photographer, it seems like the decent thing to do to consider supporting them by purchasing through affiliate links. (The cost to the buyer is the same, whether they buy directly from the online vendor or through the links.)
Now about poor reviews... There are several reasons for them, and I'm not just writing about Fujifilm here.
1. Any honest, thorough reviewer is going to have some critical comments and observations to share about any product. Even great products have flaws. Noting those is not a "poor review." In fact, as a person reading a review, I would want the review to mention these things.
2. Some products really do have serious issues or may be unsuited to certain kinds of potential users. And occasionally a company does cough up a poorly designed or implemented product or one that has a functional flaw. In other cases there are legitimate questions to be asked about the usefulness or suitability of certain features.
3. Some reviewers do offer over-the-top and sometimes over-the-top-negative reviews that are unwarranted. They do this because it gets attention. This is an old, well-understood tactic. I first learned about it back in the early days of personal computers. There was a well-known computer writer by the name of John Dvorak. He was "renowned" for his over-the-top positive and negative reviews. The strategy was to get attention by creating conflict and by making wild claims. It is the old "no such thing as bad publicity" trick. In some cases he would write something inflammatory ab out Brand X, inciting angry reactions from Brand X partisans and gleeful responses from Brand X haters... only to take the opposite tack a few weeks later! It works! Perhaps you can think of a few names in the photography world who do something similar.
Finally, my own thoughts about the XH2, for what they are worth, include the following:
1. It is likely a well-designed and well-constructed camera that marks a step forward in several ways for Fujifilm APS-C systems.
2. I suspect that the two-sensor scheme here is not likely to last very long, and that Fujifilm will mostly settle on one for the XH2 and other of their upcoming APS-C sensor cameras, as they have consistently done for over a decade now. (My bet is on the 40MP sensor becoming the new standard, but we'll see.)
3. While it is clear to me that there are Fujifilm users who want a bigger and heavier APS-C camera, I am not convinced that there is a sufficient market for the XH2 any more than there was for the XH1, especially once newer versions of the XT and other cameras arrive.
Dan
Sauseschritt wrote:
I think its simply the classic example of Fujifilm consistently getting poor reviews from everybody, simply because these reviewers live from the revenue they get from these reviews and Fujifilm doesnt give the same revenue that you get from companies like Sony or Sigma.
Meaning if a shop sells a Fujifilm they make less profit than if you buy a Sony at the same price point, and thus the reviewer also gets less money if you buy a Fujifilm product from one of their links.
Ken Rockwell and Thom Hogan sometimes openly talk about how their links give them revenue. Ken Rockwell even specifically asks for people to buy stuff through his links. Not of interest for me as a european personally because buying stuff in the USA makes no sense for me whatsoever and would result in a lot of unnecessary headaches easily avoided by buying the same thing in Europe.
Bottom line, I only trust very few sources on giving fairly accurate Fujifilm information, including DPReviewTV.
The X-H2(s) is a fine camera, and my complaints are really just nitpicks.
Quite frankly the next item on my want to have list is at least one D850 and that has two different card slots as well. I still am very interested in Nikon DSLRs because I have a couple Nikkor AF glas, all of which I love in regarding to their output but certainly also their build quality, and there is still no possibility to use them with autofocus support on any mirrorless.
...Show more →
|
