An interpretation of Phil's review of the S3

Started Mar 17, 2005 | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Bruce Douglas
Forum MemberPosts: 78
Like?
An interpretation of Phil's review of the S3
Mar 17, 2005

Why is the S3 only "above average" in spite of 2 more stops of dynamic range and other benefits? Apparently because it is too slow, and too expensive. These criticisms are valid and important to many photographers, but it seems eccentric to give a single overall rating to a camera (or any other product) that has many facets. As an obvous example, a Leica M-camera has a terrible viewfinder that shows only about 85% of what the lens sees, can't focus closer than about 30", can't accomodate telephoto lenses, and is very expensive. But many great photographers have used this camera series because of its well known virtues in certain situations. If Phil's approach had been used to rate the Leica M3 when it came out, it would have earned a below-average rating. DPReview's evaluations are important for the information they convey. The overall ratinga are much less useful, and should be abandoned.
--
Bruce Douglas

ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
MarkNew
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow