Wondering why DPReview ignored the M

Started Jul 29, 2013 | Discussions
delete-pending
delete-pending Regular Member • Posts: 161
Re: The Name Of This Web Site Is . . .

Maybe with recent close, formal ties with Amazon and introduction of the Gearshop, the profile of this site has changed, and the name "Digital Photography Review" is not describing it's real purpose as well, as it used to?

Edmund Dorf wrote:

. . . Digital Photography Review. That's REVIEW. That's what they (are supposed) to do here.

...

Ray Chen Veteran Member • Posts: 9,185
Wait No More: M Will be Fully Tested After 1D X (nt)
-- hide signature --

____ ____ _ _ ____
|__/ |__| \ / |
| \ | | | |___ o

 Ray Chen's gear list:Ray Chen's gear list
Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM
Mahmoud Mousef Senior Member • Posts: 2,733
Re: Wondering why DPReview ignored the M

gmcooper wrote:

I wonder why they never considered the M good enough to devote resources to reviewing it.

Not sure.

But sometimes I've wondered if there is some manufacturer pressure from manufacturers to not review 'imperfect' products.

Because detailed reviews of a company's products from such a high-profile website could result in a big headache for the manufacturers to move stock. It wouldn't surprise me if it goes on, but I am not in any way suggesting that it does. It just wouldn't surprise me.

Joe Talks Photo Gear
Joe Talks Photo Gear Regular Member • Posts: 183
Re: Wondering why DPReview ignored the M
1

Mahmoud Mousef wrote:

gmcooper wrote:

I wonder why they never considered the M good enough to devote resources to reviewing it.

Not sure.

But sometimes I've wondered if there is some manufacturer pressure from manufacturers to not review 'imperfect' products.

Because detailed reviews of a company's products from such a high-profile website could result in a big headache for the manufacturers to move stock. It wouldn't surprise me if it goes on, but I am not in any way suggesting that it does. It just wouldn't surprise me.

Help me understand how a DPR analysis now will help you one way or the other well over a year after the camera has been available and the camera having been thoroughly investigated? Thanks.

-- hide signature --

Joe D.

Mahmoud Mousef Senior Member • Posts: 2,733
Re: Wondering why DPReview ignored the M
1

Joe Talks Photo Gear wrote:

Mahmoud Mousef wrote:

gmcooper wrote:

I wonder why they never considered the M good enough to devote resources to reviewing it.

Not sure.

But sometimes I've wondered if there is some manufacturer pressure from manufacturers to not review 'imperfect' products.

Because detailed reviews of a company's products from such a high-profile website could result in a big headache for the manufacturers to move stock. It wouldn't surprise me if it goes on, but I am not in any way suggesting that it does. It just wouldn't surprise me.

Help me understand how a DPR analysis now will help you one way or the other well over a year after the camera has been available and the camera having been thoroughly investigated? Thanks.

I'm not sure if your response was supposed to be directed at me or the topic-starter. I'll answer anyway.

I am not so much looking for a review to influence my decisions (the price does that pretty well, and other sites have done their run-downs) but it's more of a "I wonder why they haven't..."-type of thing.

Speaking for myself only, of course.

padmasana
padmasana Regular Member • Posts: 274
Re: Wondering why DPReview ignored the M
2

I sometimes find myself looking up old reviews on equipment I own. It's interesting to see if one's own impressions are the same as others have had and perhaps there is an angle or a tip that proves useful. It's very similar to reading through a forum to see how things have struck other people.

 padmasana's gear list:padmasana's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS M
happypoppeye
happypoppeye Veteran Member • Posts: 3,894
Can't review everything...
2

gmcooper wrote:

I think I have this right: The M was introduced in July 2012 and previewed by DPR. Since that time, a quick count shows that DPR has reviewed over 100 new cameras. I wonder why they never considered the M good enough to devote resources to reviewing it. One year later it appears to be among the cameras attracting the most interest.

You see one of these threads in just about every Body specific forum ...there are hundreds of cameras released every year and it would probably take a lot more resources to review every one. ...and the M was pretty much known to be dead on arrival with the AF ...the popularity of the M has just spiked with the advent of the price reduction and firmware update so don't count the review out, but reset the clock from the firmware/price update.

 happypoppeye's gear list:happypoppeye's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS30 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario HD 12-32mm F3.5-5.6 Mega OIS
MOD Olga Johnson Forum Pro • Posts: 24,353
Re: not 100

RedFox88 wrote:

gmcooper wrote:

I think I have this right: The M was introduced in July 2012 and previewed by DPR. Since that time, a quick count shows that DPR has reviewed over 100 new cameras.

I think your above statement is wrong. There is no way that DPR has reviewed 100 cameras in the last year. Maybe 100 previews and reviews but not reviews alone.

more like ~75 reviews AND previews including those of lenses.

-- hide signature --

Olga

tomtom50 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,244
Re: not 100

My guess it that it sold poorly and fell off their radar.

Has the fire sale really sold a lot of cameras or did it just clear existing stock?

Has Canon made it clear the series has a future in the US?

I can't say that if I were PDReview I would necessarily be feeling it was a top priority. As Canon's entry in the mirrorless segment I think they should get it done. I can see they may see their mission differently.

 tomtom50's gear list:tomtom50's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS M Sony Alpha NEX-3N Sony a6000
Digital Shutterbug Veteran Member • Posts: 3,880
Re: not 100

tomtom50 wrote:

My guess it that it sold poorly and fell off their radar.

Has the fire sale really sold a lot of cameras or did it just clear existing stock?

There is not doubt whatsoever that it has sold a lot of cameras. Considering that there have been so many new purchasers reporting here that they received cameras with the new firmware, Canon was not clearing old stock.

Has Canon made it clear the series has a future in the US?

I wonder just the opposite. Has Canon made it clear the series does not have a future in the US? I haven't seen anything from Canon to indicate either way.

I can't say that if I were PDReview I would necessarily be feeling it was a top priority. As Canon's entry in the mirrorless segment I think they should get it done. I can see they may see their mission differently.

I don't see how another review will make much of a difference at this point. Anyone having bought one shouldn't care. Those that didn't jump on the reduced price by now probably won't be persuaded to now, even with a glowing review.

Steve

(unknown member) Forum Pro • Posts: 11,521
Re: Wondering why DPReview ignored the M

gmcooper wrote:

I think I have this right: The M was introduced in July 2012 and previewed by DPR. Since that time, a quick count shows that DPR has reviewed over 100 new cameras. I wonder why they never considered the M good enough to devote resources to reviewing it. One year later it appears to be among the cameras attracting the most interest.

the 1Dx doesn't have a review either so I guess the mighty M is in good standing

delete-pending
delete-pending Regular Member • Posts: 161
It would be polite for a dpreview person to comment

I realize that dpreview is under no obligation whatsoever to make any comments in any thread about anything. However I believe that in this specific case it would be polite for someone from dpreview to make a short comment.

Jonathan Brady
Jonathan Brady Veteran Member • Posts: 6,720
Got it all wrong

The lack of a review is because the 1Dx is both a horrible camera and Canon asked them not to review it and Canon intends to stop supporting the 1D line.  /sarcasm

(unknown member) Forum Pro • Posts: 11,521
Re: Got it all wrong
1

Jonathan Brady wrote:

The lack of a review is because the 1Dx is both a horrible camera and Canon asked them not to review it and Canon intends to stop supporting the 1D line. /sarcasm

lenses and camera bodies for the EF mount went on across the board rebate sales last month as well - coincidence?

Digital Shutterbug Veteran Member • Posts: 3,880
Re: Got it all wrong
1

Jonathan Brady wrote:

The lack of a review is because the 1Dx is both a horrible camera and Canon asked them not to review it and Canon intends to stop supporting the 1D line. /sarcasm

Yep. It's as obvious as the nose on your face. Nokia has eclipsed Canon's 1DX, and all others with their 41MP smartphone. With more pictures being taken with smartphones on any given day than with cameras. there is clearly no future for cameras. Canon is closing shop. Nikon is soon to follow. You can take that to the bank. 

Steve

tomtom50 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,244
Re: not 100
1

Digital Shutterbug wrote:

tomtom50 wrote:

My guess it that it sold poorly and fell off their radar.

Has the fire sale really sold a lot of cameras or did it just clear existing stock?

There is not doubt whatsoever that it has sold a lot of cameras. Considering that there have been so many new purchasers reporting here that they received cameras with the new firmware, Canon was not clearing old stock.

My EOS-m had 2.0.2 loaded. It also was not sealed. There is no way to know if the firmware was updated on existing stock.

Has Canon made it clear the series has a future in the US?

I wonder just the opposite. Has Canon made it clear the series does not have a future in the US? I haven't seen anything from Canon to indicate either way.

Not selling the third lens in a so-called system does send a signal about their commitment to this system in the US.

 tomtom50's gear list:tomtom50's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS M Sony Alpha NEX-3N Sony a6000
(unknown member) Forum Pro • Posts: 11,521
Re: not 100
1

tomtom50 wrote:

Digital Shutterbug wrote:

tomtom50 wrote:

My guess it that it sold poorly and fell off their radar.

Has the fire sale really sold a lot of cameras or did it just clear existing stock?

There is not doubt whatsoever that it has sold a lot of cameras. Considering that there have been so many new purchasers reporting here that they received cameras with the new firmware, Canon was not clearing old stock.

My EOS-m had 2.0.2 loaded. It also was not sealed. There is no way to know if the firmware was updated on existing stock.

why on earth would canon do that? name one good reason why canon would spend additional money to open boxes, workbench the unit, update the firmware, close back / repackage the box - when they are selling them for half normal price? When they provide instructions and a download to the firmware update directly.

right.. because there IS no logical reason for it.

MOD Olga Johnson Forum Pro • Posts: 24,353
Re: not 100

tomtom50 wrote:

Digital Shutterbug wrote:

tomtom50 wrote:

My guess it that it sold poorly and fell off their radar.

Has the fire sale really sold a lot of cameras or did it just clear existing stock?

There is not doubt whatsoever that it has sold a lot of cameras. Considering that there have been so many new purchasers reporting here that they received cameras with the new firmware, Canon was not clearing old stock.

My EOS-m had 2.0.2 loaded. It also was not sealed. There is no way to know if the firmware was updated on existing stock.

All Canon camera boxes come unsealed.  Canon is not known to update cameras that are already boxed.

Has Canon made it clear the series has a future in the US?

I wonder just the opposite. Has Canon made it clear the series does not have a future in the US? I haven't seen anything from Canon to indicate either way.

Not selling the third lens in a so-called system does send a signal about their commitment to this system in the US.

-- hide signature --

Olga

Jonathan Brady
Jonathan Brady Veteran Member • Posts: 6,720
ABANDON SHIP! AHHHHHH!!!!

padmasana
padmasana Regular Member • Posts: 274
Re: Got it all wrong

Digital Shutterbug wrote:

Jonathan Brady wrote:

The lack of a review is because the 1Dx is both a horrible camera and Canon asked them not to review it and Canon intends to stop supporting the 1D line. /sarcasm

Yep. It's as obvious as the nose on your face. Nokia has eclipsed Canon's 1DX, and all others with their 41MP smartphone. With more pictures being taken with smartphones on any given day than with cameras. there is clearly no future for cameras. Canon is closing shop. Nikon is soon to follow. You can take that to the bank.

Steve

Don't forget the Lyto Light Field Camera, now available at a big-box retailer near you!

 padmasana's gear list:padmasana's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS M
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads