AP K-7 Review
Posted 13/08/2009 - 23:50
Link
I wonder if anybody knows of a truly objective camera review publication, whether ink or Internet. The problem with the AP review (from what I read here) is not that the review itself is particularly unfair, or even not unfair at all, but that the cover treatment seems to marginalise the camera, and thereby imply that it is not worthy of serious consideration.
G
G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Posted 14/08/2009 - 00:03
Link
Well I had a little play with a K7 on my short trip back to Scotland and it was very nice, but, I will not be buying one for the moment as I have spent a lot of money on lenses and 2 K20's and I am still finding new things that it can do, I have my X70 for movies in HD so a K7 with all the bells and whistles I don't need, perhaps I might upgrade when I have exhausted the K20's capabilities,
Posted 14/08/2009 - 00:07
Link
Tooks wrote:
Agreed, there could be something in what you say, but proving it is a problem! I have read similar similar stories about bicycle magazines reviews being swayed by big brands advertising revenue, but if that were so they would read much more like 'advertorials' than they do currently.
But anyway, apologies again if I came across wrong, with retrospect there should have been a few more smileys/winks in my initial post!
Advertisers and magazine publishers are not stupid. These things are not done obviously, and nothing is in writing, but you can bet that there is a link between the prominence afforded to certain brands over a year and the amount of advertising placed by the brand-owners.Agreed, there could be something in what you say, but proving it is a problem! I have read similar similar stories about bicycle magazines reviews being swayed by big brands advertising revenue, but if that were so they would read much more like 'advertorials' than they do currently.
But anyway, apologies again if I came across wrong, with retrospect there should have been a few more smileys/winks in my initial post!
G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Posted 14/08/2009 - 00:10
Link
George Lazarette wrote:
I wonder if anybody knows of a truly objective camera review publication, whether ink or Internet. The problem with the AP review (from what I read here) is not that the review itself is particularly unfair, or even not unfair at all, but that the cover treatment seems to marginalise the camera, and thereby imply that it is not worthy of serious consideration.
G
Yes it's a tricky one. I think only a few people will know why the K-7 wasn't given a little more coverage on the front cover. The reasons behind it might be really quite benign and I doubt whether anyone here or anywhere else will get to find out if the reasoning was otherwise I wonder if anybody knows of a truly objective camera review publication, whether ink or Internet. The problem with the AP review (from what I read here) is not that the review itself is particularly unfair, or even not unfair at all, but that the cover treatment seems to marginalise the camera, and thereby imply that it is not worthy of serious consideration.
G
Still it was a very positive review and I think most people who buy AP and are keen photographers will generally read most articles, reviews and previews so I don't think it's a great loss for Pentax. I still think they should have supplied AP with a better lens though
Posted 14/08/2009 - 00:13
Link
Joe S wrote:
The cover is made to attract potential buyers of the magazine more than being representive of it's content. Putting a K-7 in the spotlight on the cover would fit the content inside better, but mag staff must have thought that most potential buyers couldn't give a d*** about Pentax. Sad, but I think, true!
Got it in one.The cover is made to attract potential buyers of the magazine more than being representive of it's content. Putting a K-7 in the spotlight on the cover would fit the content inside better, but mag staff must have thought that most potential buyers couldn't give a d*** about Pentax. Sad, but I think, true!
Al
Posted 14/08/2009 - 00:16
Link
Greytop wrote:
Still it was a very positive review and I think most people who buy AP and are keen photographers will generally read most articles, reviews and previews so I don't think it's a great loss for Pentax. I still think they should have supplied AP with a better lens though
The point is this: thye should have supplied them with a better lens and bought a huge double page spread, and probably offered a free K7 to be won! This is the way the world works
George Lazarette wrote:
I wonder if anybody knows of a truly objective camera review publication, whether ink or Internet. The problem with the AP review (from what I read here) is not that the review itself is particularly unfair, or even not unfair at all, but that the cover treatment seems to marginalise the camera, and thereby imply that it is not worthy of serious consideration.
G
Yes it's a tricky one. I think only a few people will know why the K-7 wasn't given a little more coverage on the front cover. The reasons behind it might be really quite benign and I doubt whether anyone here or anywhere else will get to find out if the reasoning was otherwise I wonder if anybody knows of a truly objective camera review publication, whether ink or Internet. The problem with the AP review (from what I read here) is not that the review itself is particularly unfair, or even not unfair at all, but that the cover treatment seems to marginalise the camera, and thereby imply that it is not worthy of serious consideration.
G
Still it was a very positive review and I think most people who buy AP and are keen photographers will generally read most articles, reviews and previews so I don't think it's a great loss for Pentax. I still think they should have supplied AP with a better lens though
FILM - Pentax: LX, K2 - 24/2.8, 40/2.8, 50/1.4, 120/2.8, 80-200/4.5, 28-105mm 2.8 macro, AF 280T
DIGITAL - Nikon : D300 - 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR DX
DIGITAL - Nikon : D300 - 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR DX
Posted 14/08/2009 - 00:33
Link
If Pentax can't market their cameras properly that's down to them. It's not any magazine's job to do it for them.
Incidentally, a friend of mine, a Nikon user is quite convinced that magazines give Nikkor lenses a harder time than they do other makers.
I personally interpret this as meaning that the tests don't reflect his own enthusiasm for Nikkor lenses and his perception that they are always better than everyone else's. Thus, he thinks they are biased and I think they are objective!
Incidentally, a friend of mine, a Nikon user is quite convinced that magazines give Nikkor lenses a harder time than they do other makers.
I personally interpret this as meaning that the tests don't reflect his own enthusiasm for Nikkor lenses and his perception that they are always better than everyone else's. Thus, he thinks they are biased and I think they are objective!
Posted 14/08/2009 - 00:42
Link
lemmy wrote:
If Pentax can't market their cameras properly that's down to them. It's not any magazine's job to do it for them.
Incidentally, a friend of mine, a Nikon user is quite convinced that magazines give Nikkor lenses a harder time than they do other makers.
I personally interpret this as meaning that the tests don't reflect his own enthusiasm for Nikkor lenses and his perception that they are always better than everyone else's. Thus, he thinks they are biased and I think they are objective!
I checked out some Nikon fora and surprise surprise the same kind of discussions take place such as "Who needs video in their DSLR?" "I won't be upgrading [to the D300s] just to get video" "It's not worth and extra £500" and so on...with the same kind of paranoia and victim mentality believing the magazines are slanted towards Canon. It's quite funnmy really...these insecurities are not reserved for Pentax users
If Pentax can't market their cameras properly that's down to them. It's not any magazine's job to do it for them.
Incidentally, a friend of mine, a Nikon user is quite convinced that magazines give Nikkor lenses a harder time than they do other makers.
I personally interpret this as meaning that the tests don't reflect his own enthusiasm for Nikkor lenses and his perception that they are always better than everyone else's. Thus, he thinks they are biased and I think they are objective!
FILM - Pentax: LX, K2 - 24/2.8, 40/2.8, 50/1.4, 120/2.8, 80-200/4.5, 28-105mm 2.8 macro, AF 280T
DIGITAL - Nikon : D300 - 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR DX
DIGITAL - Nikon : D300 - 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR DX
Posted 14/08/2009 - 00:54
Link
The mags ARE slanted, and they're slanted towards the biggest advertisers. That's not paranoia, it's how the world works, as you said earlier.
G
G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Posted 14/08/2009 - 04:43
Link
WOW!! What a thread to read on weekends eve!
Good morning gentlemen. Warm (hot actually) regards from Qatar.
I didn't read the review, but I will. As other here have done, I bought my K-7 without testing/trying. Why? "Once married to Pentax, buried with Pentax". I have faith in the brand.
It may just be that N & C spend a lot more on adverts than Pentax UK hence the loyalty of staff to N&C?
As is often said these days, You Know Who You Are, as a Pentax user, you see what others cannot.
Hell, these days, I like a Pentax or two hanging off my shoulders just to show the sheep out there that I'm different. I have too many years of faultless use with the brand behind me.
Reviews should not raise temperatures, just a wry smile as you realise that a reviewer is only human and therefore has more faults than any DSLR.
Regards
Good morning gentlemen. Warm (hot actually) regards from Qatar.
I didn't read the review, but I will. As other here have done, I bought my K-7 without testing/trying. Why? "Once married to Pentax, buried with Pentax". I have faith in the brand.
It may just be that N & C spend a lot more on adverts than Pentax UK hence the loyalty of staff to N&C?
As is often said these days, You Know Who You Are, as a Pentax user, you see what others cannot.
Hell, these days, I like a Pentax or two hanging off my shoulders just to show the sheep out there that I'm different. I have too many years of faultless use with the brand behind me.
Reviews should not raise temperatures, just a wry smile as you realise that a reviewer is only human and therefore has more faults than any DSLR.
Regards
Too far from a shore.
Posted 14/08/2009 - 08:49
Link
The reviewer, Angela NIcholson, wrote a very bland piece in a way, and I think she was trying very hard to be fair and unbiased. So much so that little emotion comes across. This may be because AP have been given a hard time about this on their own forum, Damien Demolder as well joined in the threads and I think they have tried to rebalance.
I suspect she would be surprised if anyone thought she was biased.
I suspect she would be surprised if anyone thought she was biased.
Best regards, John
Posted 14/08/2009 - 08:55
Link
lemmy wrote:
If Pentax can't market their cameras properly that's down to them. It's not any magazine's job to do it for them.
Incidentally, a friend of mine, a Nikon user is quite convinced that magazines give Nikkor lenses a harder time than they do other makers.
I personally interpret this as meaning that the tests don't reflect his own enthusiasm for Nikkor lenses and his perception that they are always better than everyone else's. Thus, he thinks they are biased and I think they are objective!
Spot on Lemmy, an interesting post.
If Pentax can't market their cameras properly that's down to them. It's not any magazine's job to do it for them.
Incidentally, a friend of mine, a Nikon user is quite convinced that magazines give Nikkor lenses a harder time than they do other makers.
I personally interpret this as meaning that the tests don't reflect his own enthusiasm for Nikkor lenses and his perception that they are always better than everyone else's. Thus, he thinks they are biased and I think they are objective!
Posted 14/08/2009 - 09:02
Link
George Lazarette wrote:
G
It could just as well be that there is a link between the prominence of manufacturers products and the amount of advertising purely because the company has products to market?Tooks wrote:
Agreed, there could be something in what you say, but proving it is a problem! I have read similar similar stories about bicycle magazines reviews being swayed by big brands advertising revenue, but if that were so they would read much more like 'advertorials' than they do currently.
But anyway, apologies again if I came across wrong, with retrospect there should have been a few more smileys/winks in my initial post!
Advertisers and magazine publishers are not stupid. These things are not done obviously, and nothing is in writing, but you can bet that there is a link between the prominence afforded to certain brands over a year and the amount of advertising placed by the brand-owners.Agreed, there could be something in what you say, but proving it is a problem! I have read similar similar stories about bicycle magazines reviews being swayed by big brands advertising revenue, but if that were so they would read much more like 'advertorials' than they do currently.
But anyway, apologies again if I came across wrong, with retrospect there should have been a few more smileys/winks in my initial post!
G
Even Pentax, who I think we all agree aren't the best at marketing their products, have advertised the K-7 both pre and post launch. The ubiquitous nature of other products in the mag/web reviews might just be down to the fact they release more products?
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
24419 posts
24 years
Tyldesley,
Manchester