Review K3 mark lll?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
John_A_G Veteran Member • Posts: 8,137
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
2

doceyes wrote:

bob5050 wrote:

Roland Karlsson wrote:

In principle, a trained reviewer that tests several brands should be the most objective reviewer. In practice, it might not be so. Sometimes.

Unfortunately, I don't think that that's even true in principle. The only way a non-user can be equally objective about any camera is to be equally unfamiliar with anything else. Otherwise, they're subject to the same expectation/(un)familiarity biases as anyone else.

The cliché critique of the K-3iii at this point is "a worthy upgrade, but not worth changing brands for." The question is, do they say that consistently about every other brand? But what recent high end camera is it not true of? The core issue for a reviewer today is that all top SLRs and MILCs will deliver outstanding results,

Comparative specs matter most in an environment of significant and rapid evolution and a growing market, where users need to know who's in the lead, and have no or little existing investment. Neither is true today of ILC cameras. So fitness to use and user has really become the only thing that matters.

Bob5050….very well written. Thanks.

Reminds me of a Consumer Reports magazine a friend showed me…Sept 2021 issue. In the car review was the 2021 new Corvette. What useful information was in the review….nothing. What was the driving experience, mpg, etc….nothing. But they rated it worse than a budget SUV. In the negatives were the comments that it is too low to the ground so it is difficult to get in and out of the car. And other comments such as there are blind spots to the left and right and behind the car. Then I read reviews by actual car people and customers…no comparison. Same with camera reviews. They will all have a bias or the person is not well informed or experienced with the use of ie a DSLR with an optical prism viewfinder. If the next review is similar to the new photos DPR posted then I would not expect much. But that would not make my decision about the purchase.

so, if the reviewer is well versed with an optical viewfinder and still doesn't see that as a big benefit over EVF, is that person a legit reviewer?

I think it's perfectly valid to suggest the reviewer has to have a history of competence with the products they're reviewing.  It's why when I was making money shooting sports about a decade ago I didn't care at all what DPR said about the cameras - they didn't have professional sports photographers/PJs reviewing them.  I values the opinions of the working pros more.

But, the part about the viewfinder baffles me here.  I was pretty sure most of the DPR review staff had extensive experience with DSLRs.  Maybe I'm mistaken and they now employ people whose sole experience is with mirrorless.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD Mako2011
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow