Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.21 #5 · RG on 1D Mk IV autofocus performance | |
jamesf99 wrote:
It's not a lack of critical thinking, it's in most cases an awareness that something isn't right with this "review".
I am not in the market for this camera, nor do I plan to buy one any time soon. My interest is solely in Canon's engineering development, quality control, and integrity; three areas where they've proven themselves lacking in recent years.
I've always supported RG and never believed he demonstrated any bias, even after he switched to Nikon. If he actually has uncovered another substandard Canon product being sold as a professional tool, I, and anyone that thinks,should congratulate him. But this time RG's "review" has problems that hurt his credibility IMO, not the least of which include the following:
1) He admitted he didn't use current firmware. All results may be invalid.
2) While this never bothered me previously, he accepts money from, and uses, Nikon equipment. I'm a big fan of the Nikon D3 series, but claiming that Nikon advertising dollars and relationship are not a consideration, one way or another, are simply disingenuous or misguided. Unless he has another mfg waiting in the wings to make up for a potential ad revenue loss, his comments can no longer be considered unbiased without question. he also accepts revenue from Panasonic (not a real competitor) and TT, based on what one can assume is a equal opportunity ad package. Also, remember, Canon was once his principle advertiser... ** see below...
3) He didn't show side-by-side comparisons demonstrating Nikon got the shot that Canon missed. Evidence (side-by-side images) from other reviews refute his claims. Additionally, the camera (1D4) is new and Canon deserves the chance to make corrections, just as Nikon did with the D3.
4) and this is the one that really bothers me, knowing full well what his comments would do, he purposely/intentionally left the specter of another AF debacle hanging over the cameras head, with a very unprofessional "I'll correct it in a few months" dismissal. That's the epitome of "Yellow journalism".
I'm actually saddened by this. I'm sure RG is a decent guy that just made a huge, and preventable mistake. Even if the 1D4 has problems, it doesn't excuse the way this was presented. There's a higher standard on review sites (besides DPR and ken Rockwell's that is) and once you lose credibility for misleading/misinforming, it may be gone for good. IMO he should immediately publish an acknowledgment that he screwed up, but it's his reputation.
** A large group of Toyota dealers in the South eastern US pulled their advertising from ABC affiliates because according to the group, ABC was focusing too much on the negative aspects of the Toyota recalls. While incredibly dumb, this shows exactly what advertisers (that lack credibility) will do when criticized. Are Nikon and Canon really above such tactics? Did Canon end their advertising relationship or did RG kick them out? I don't know, but one rightly should wonder when ever money is at stake......Show more →
He addresses point 1 and 3 in the first page:
"The plan was to roll those comparison sequences into this article, along with an overview of Nikon autofocus and some general conclusions about how the AF systems compare. It became necessary to modify that plan when Canon released firmware v1.0.6 for the EOS-1D Mark IV, an update whose only stated change was to AI Servo tracking. This meant having to redo much of the shooting we'd already done with the EOS-1D Mark IV, which in turn meant it was then impossible to meet our deadline for this story, ahead of a period of heavy travel, and include all of what we had wanted to about Nikon.
That will come in another story to follow, a bit later in the first half of this year."
And I missed out point #4. Where does he said that?
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
|
but you may want to read the SS thread posted in the previous page. 