Barney Britton

Barney Britton

DPReview Administrator
Lives in United States Seattle, United States
Works as a Editor
Has a website at www.dpreview.com
Joined on Nov 2, 2009
About me:

I'm in charge of the editorial content of dpreview. I joined dpreview when it was based in London in November 2009, after several years as a print journalist in the UK specialist photographic press. I moved from London to Seattle, USA, a year later and I've been here ever since.

Comments

Total: 4183, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article On Assignment with Kylie Mazon and the Canon EOS M6 (135 comments in total)
In reply to:

whakapu: Dang, just watched a whole sponsored vid because I overlooked that word "sponsored" in small type. Puzzled throughout that it had that faux-authentic voiceover cadence used in ads .... eventually had to go in search of the word "sponsored".

" I overlooked that word "sponsored" in small type. "

To be fair, it sounds like you also overlooked the brightly-colored 'sponsored' ribbon on the homepage and the on-screen acknowledgement 1 second into the video ;)

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2018 at 19:37 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Er, this isn't selling for $100. There is a $99 fee to enter into a reservation agreement, which then has you go through making an actual order when the product is ready (in Summer): https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0301/6769/files/Reservation_Agreement.pdf?18234079904097439621

Thanks, I just made this edit.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2018 at 00:29 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kwick1: Ridiculous conclusion. Goes against your own grading system. "Scoring is relative only to the other cameras in the same category.". Well, the camera in this category is the EM1 II, and it got Gold.

All reviews are essentially subjective. Think about it. The best we can do is base our conclusions on measured data where that's possible, and informed experience when it isn't. And then we show our workings, in the form of the review that you (hopefully) just read. Whether our reviews are 'reliable' or not is up to you to decide, I think. We've done our part.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2018 at 21:38 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

Chris2210: I can understand a camera being marked down if its features are superseded by a competitors, but when it matches what's on the market at present, gets the same score as it... it just seems slightly capricious to award one gold and the other silver simply on release date.

In the grand scheme of things it's pretty meaningless, nothing to get upset about. I suppose it just niggles slightly to see this behaviour from my favourite reviews site. The point is I've always seen the DPReview process as - in intent - as objective as possible within the constraints of the variables and the user experience. This seems to be the antithesis of that.

This is the same scoring and awards system we've had for many, many years. Nothing has changed.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2018 at 20:30 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kwick1: Ridiculous conclusion. Goes against your own grading system. "Scoring is relative only to the other cameras in the same category.". Well, the camera in this category is the EM1 II, and it got Gold.

"I've concluded that this is a powerful camera that will win many friends for reasons particularly related to its build quality, outstanding design, handling and impressive operational capability."

We agree. The G9 scored very highly indeed.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2018 at 20:29 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kwick1: Ridiculous conclusion. Goes against your own grading system. "Scoring is relative only to the other cameras in the same category.". Well, the camera in this category is the EM1 II, and it got Gold.

Actually, it scored the same as the E-M1 Mark II. The awards (gold and silver) are separate, and awarded using a different logic which is explained in several places in this thread.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2018 at 19:38 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

FrequencyDancer: Personally I'm not too bothered whether it gets a gold rating or something else.

Cameras are incredibly personal and features that are important for one can be insignificant for others. That's something that only comes from personal experience and one of the great thing about DPR reviews is they are thorough enough for someone to dig into the details and figure out whether it is a good choice for any individual.

However, DPR do carry some industry weight, for example many retail outlets show the DPR rating on their product information cards that accompany the camera on display.

While the excuse that this camera is released later and therefore has to work harder for a gold award is easy to follow logic, in reality, as of today, there are many 'current' gold award cameras that I would happily pass over in favour of this silver award camera, so I don't feel DPR are actually achieving what they think they are trying to achieve with this rating system.

Bottom line: it's a great camera

2)
The value of the awards for our readers is the same as it is for the manufacturers. They're a quick and simple way of recognizing what DPReview thinks is an outstanding camera in a competitive class. Technically innovative, standard-setting or uncommonly nice to use cameras tend to get gold awards, for example.

The awards are not a substitute for the more detailed scoring breakdown, and they are not a substitute for an informed reading of the full review. Mostly, the people who take issue with the awards are either a) fanboy trolls or b) people who don't quite understand how and why they're bestowed. Hopefully, assuming you fall into the b) category, I've answered your questions? Let me know.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2018 at 18:30 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

FrequencyDancer: Personally I'm not too bothered whether it gets a gold rating or something else.

Cameras are incredibly personal and features that are important for one can be insignificant for others. That's something that only comes from personal experience and one of the great thing about DPR reviews is they are thorough enough for someone to dig into the details and figure out whether it is a good choice for any individual.

However, DPR do carry some industry weight, for example many retail outlets show the DPR rating on their product information cards that accompany the camera on display.

While the excuse that this camera is released later and therefore has to work harder for a gold award is easy to follow logic, in reality, as of today, there are many 'current' gold award cameras that I would happily pass over in favour of this silver award camera, so I don't feel DPR are actually achieving what they think they are trying to achieve with this rating system.

Bottom line: it's a great camera

1) Robemo - calm down. Our review scoring and award methodology has been largely unchanged for the better part of 20 years. It's evolved over that time, (fortunately the days of 'highly recommended - just' are behind us) but we're using basically the same logic now as we always have, and it's basically the same logic that the majority of other review sites/magazines use.

I say again - retailers are not provided with the awards logos. Manufacturers can request use of our awards, for promotional materials. Sometimes those materials are used as part of retail POS displays (etc.) but awards are never sent to retailers directly, either by DPReview, or by the manufacturers (this is something that we stipulate). Is that 'passing the buck'? Sure - OK. I guess?

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2018 at 18:29 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

FrequencyDancer: Personally I'm not too bothered whether it gets a gold rating or something else.

Cameras are incredibly personal and features that are important for one can be insignificant for others. That's something that only comes from personal experience and one of the great thing about DPR reviews is they are thorough enough for someone to dig into the details and figure out whether it is a good choice for any individual.

However, DPR do carry some industry weight, for example many retail outlets show the DPR rating on their product information cards that accompany the camera on display.

While the excuse that this camera is released later and therefore has to work harder for a gold award is easy to follow logic, in reality, as of today, there are many 'current' gold award cameras that I would happily pass over in favour of this silver award camera, so I don't feel DPR are actually achieving what they think they are trying to achieve with this rating system.

Bottom line: it's a great camera

"it becomes clear that the use of these ratings/Awards by retail outlets is simply misleading."

That's far from clear, actually. We don't sell our awards graphics to anyone, and we only supply them to the device manufacturer. If a manufacturer asks to use them for their promotional purposes, that's up to them. A retailer can only use the graphics as part of promotional materials supplied by the manufacturer.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 23:13 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

anticipation_of: It seems like all else being equal, if one were buying a high end MFT camera today, the Panasonic—not the Olympus—would probably be the one to get. If nothing else it’s a few hundred dollars cheaper for similar stills performance, and it’s the better camera for video. So it doesn’t make sense to me that the Olympus has a gold award and the Panasonic a silver; if I were new to the site and trying to decide between the two cameras, I feel like that would be misleading.

Product reviews are primarily buying guides. The fact that the G9 came out later should not affect the decisions of someone who is buying a camera today. I think that giving the G9 a silver here makes the review less useful to people who are trying to research their next camera purchase.

"maybe you read the comment above that mentions that DPR Awards are used by retail outlets to recommend products. So now your subjective 'Award' is actualy misleading buyers. That can't be the objective, can it?"

Our awards are sometimes requested by manufacturers for promotional purposes, but they're not for sale. What a company does with the award graphics is up to them. I don't see how DPReview could be said to be 'misleading buyers' in that situation...?

Also - if I might inject a note of sanity/perspective here, the issue of recommendations being provided at the time a product is reviewed, and potentially going our of date as the product ages against its competition is virtually universal.

We address it by a) making it clear how we review things so there's no ambiguity for someone who cares to do a bit of reading and b) with our near-comprehensive range of buying guides, which provide 'real-time' recommendations, and are kept up to date throughout the year.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 21:36 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

anticipation_of: It seems like all else being equal, if one were buying a high end MFT camera today, the Panasonic—not the Olympus—would probably be the one to get. If nothing else it’s a few hundred dollars cheaper for similar stills performance, and it’s the better camera for video. So it doesn’t make sense to me that the Olympus has a gold award and the Panasonic a silver; if I were new to the site and trying to decide between the two cameras, I feel like that would be misleading.

Product reviews are primarily buying guides. The fact that the G9 came out later should not affect the decisions of someone who is buying a camera today. I think that giving the G9 a silver here makes the review less useful to people who are trying to research their next camera purchase.

Oh on the contrary - we plan on changing our scoring system to better reflect a camera's position in the market *right now*. But we're not there yet - it's a lot of work. In the meantime, I completely understand why it causes confusion to some casual site visitors. The best we can do at present is to clearly explain our methodology and engage with comments like yours when the question comes up.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 19:34 UTC
In reply to:

JensR: Would have been nice to include the other weather-resistant FF option, the Pentax K-1, even if it is a 2016 camera, but I understand you could extend that to APS-C cameras and it's turtles all the way down...

More pertinently, it would also have been interesting to take a nominally unsealed camera to compare it and see how much better the Sony "seal" is than no seal.

But in any case, it seems to indicate that rubber/silicone sealing is vastly superior to the mechanical, interlocking panels of the Sony.

And yes, I am a Pentax owner, but I also own Sony.

"Pentax does not exist for dpr."

This video was made by Imaging Resource.

Nice try though!

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 19:29 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

anticipation_of: It seems like all else being equal, if one were buying a high end MFT camera today, the Panasonic—not the Olympus—would probably be the one to get. If nothing else it’s a few hundred dollars cheaper for similar stills performance, and it’s the better camera for video. So it doesn’t make sense to me that the Olympus has a gold award and the Panasonic a silver; if I were new to the site and trying to decide between the two cameras, I feel like that would be misleading.

Product reviews are primarily buying guides. The fact that the G9 came out later should not affect the decisions of someone who is buying a camera today. I think that giving the G9 a silver here makes the review less useful to people who are trying to research their next camera purchase.

If you'd like to be able to answer the question 'which camera is best for [whatever budget/usecase]' I suggest you browse our selection of buying guides (link at the top of this page). We'll be updating the relevant guides to include our final findings about the G9 very soon.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 19:22 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

anticipation_of: It seems like all else being equal, if one were buying a high end MFT camera today, the Panasonic—not the Olympus—would probably be the one to get. If nothing else it’s a few hundred dollars cheaper for similar stills performance, and it’s the better camera for video. So it doesn’t make sense to me that the Olympus has a gold award and the Panasonic a silver; if I were new to the site and trying to decide between the two cameras, I feel like that would be misleading.

Product reviews are primarily buying guides. The fact that the G9 came out later should not affect the decisions of someone who is buying a camera today. I think that giving the G9 a silver here makes the review less useful to people who are trying to research their next camera purchase.

We understand that it can be confusing, but hopefully it gets easier to understand once you've read up on our scoring and awards methodology (there's a link in the conclusion page).

Basically, the award (silver, gold or none) is subjective, and decided on by the reviewer, in conversation with other writers on staff. Cameras which set a new standard, or achieve a certain level of technical sophistication *first*, and thereby set a bar in some way, tend to be awarded gold awards. So that's the Oly E-M1 Mark II, for instance. The G9 matches the E-M1 II in some areas, exceeds it in others, and doesn't quite measure up in still others. And it was released considerably later.

Hence - silver.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 18:43 UTC
In reply to:

Manthony073: I read maybe about one comment from a woman here and the majority of the rest were from men getting defensive or underplaying what is a really huge problem that we are confronting. My point is that men we are entitled to our opinions but as photographers especially I would think this is an excellent opportunity for us to shut up and listen, women we are all ears.

Hear, hear.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 06:30 UTC
In reply to:

maljo@inreach.com: That price is breathtaking!

It's basically the same as Canon's equivalent (and older) lens. Glass like this has always been out of reach to all but the richest amateurs and major agencies.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 04:26 UTC
On article A letter from the Publisher (332 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mach Schnell: Is Phil Askey totally out of the picture now?

Chocolate bars were bigger, too!

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 01:22 UTC
On article A letter from the Publisher (332 comments in total)
In reply to:

love2travelfar: it is strange . Why would a "sponsor" want an article marked "sponsored" here?
EVERYBODY avoids those. It's almost anti-advertising.
Isn't enough to make good products everybody would push without being pushed?

Sponsored content has to be differentiated from normal editorial to satisfy certain FCC guidelines. Differentiating the two kinds of content is also a good idea from the perspective of maintaining the trust of our audience.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 01:20 UTC
On article A letter from the Publisher (332 comments in total)
In reply to:

TN Args: Thanks for the message and introduction Scott. I am pleased to read that you will be re-introducing lens tests: I was just about to write a plea for that when I read your statement.

So now I will plead for you to conduct your lens tests on multiple copies of a lens. Ten is a good number to allow a usable average to emerge and the tester can make some initial comment on variability.

A single-sample lens test is the optical equivalent of the "blog review of a camera 5 minutes after it is announced" that you referred to. Doing multi-sample testing is a great way for DPR to distinguish itself from the numerous websites that publish lens tests that are a masquerade. Remember: readers (and buyers) use these tests to *compare* lenses that often show quite small differences, so the differences get exaggerated and lenses heavily criticised on differences that might very well be products of the deficiencies of the single-sample approach to lens tests.

"So now I will plead for you to conduct your lens tests on multiple copies of a lens. Ten is a good number to allow a usable average to emerge and the tester can make some initial comment on variability."

I'm afraid we don't have the time to do that in-house, but we are exploring ways of integrating some data from multiple samples.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 01:18 UTC
On article A letter from the Publisher (332 comments in total)
In reply to:

dwill23: I barely come on here anymore as these kids out west who post photos and stories are so politically charged.

This was an escape for me (like right now, on my lunch break)...i don't need to see that crap on here. I hope it returns to it's roots. Camera only reporting, not sample pics of protests, anti police stories, etc.

Notwithstanding your highly simplistic and disingenuous characterisation, the content to which you refer makes up an absolutely tiny proportion of our annual output. I'm sorry we've (apparently) triggered you so horribly but I can assure you that the site's core mission is unchanged.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 01:12 UTC
Total: 4183, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »