dragonfist Loc: Stafford, N.Y.

I have noticed over the last couple of years that there seems to be a large disparity in camera reviews. For the most part I have noticed that CNET tends to find fault in some way or another with almost every camera they test. I realize nothing is perfect but it seems as if they go out of their way to find fault. They will pan a certain camera and then when you look up what folks that own that camera say they are for the most part very satisfied with it. Who to believe ,the pros or the folks that own and love the camera they bought? I find DP review to be objective but not so overly critical. Has anyone else noticed this.

EstherP

No, I haven't, but I must also admit that I never use CNET.
Ilike dpreview very much, partially because I have memorized the website name; also because og the side-by-side comparison feature and because the in-depth review not only is anecdotal but also posts pictures taken with the particular camera.
A do also like to see what people who own the camera have to say about it, but would want to see a bit more "I like the camera because...." instead of just saying that it is a good camera.
Just my 2-bits worth.
EstherP

Kestrel1029 Loc: Philadelphia, PA

What I have found is that the magazines love every camera, like they all tie for first place. I tend to put more stock in on-line sites like Dpreview.com and Photozone.de. I find them to be more objective. They point out the postives and the negatives of each camera, then you have to figure out what you need and what you can live with. Just my 2 cents.

n3eg Loc: West coast USA

CNET is for kids. If you're between the ages of 18-29 and a computer geek, you might be interested in what CNET has to say about something. If you're older, stick to the mainstream reviews. You've got to factor in the age and the lifestyle of the reviewer, because it always shows bias.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

Before deciding on a camera or lens, I read as many reviews about the product as I can. I even page through the Amazon buyer reviews at some point.

Yes, I do notice that CNET tends to find faults that other reviews don't. If it's not the ISO range, then it's the ergonomics or button lay-out. CNET always finds something wrong! But that's okay as long as you take it with a grain of salt.

I'm more suspicious of sites that don't find faults with any product they review, and everything is so awesome and dandy perfect. I might as well just read the company's marketing brochure instead.

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

I don't think it's the publisher as much as it is the writer. As good and fair as he is, a review of a Nikon product by George Lepp would have to be biased for his love of and relationship with Canon. Every reviewer, regardless of his intent, is going to be biased. Now if they'd just hire me, I would be totally unbiased; I'd blast enerything!

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

DPReview and Ken Rockwell are all I look at

ocbeyer Loc: Baltimore

And then there is the "unbiased" non-editorial Snapsort, that merely present the facts, line by line. Except they are often not the facts, they get the specs wrong and will award fewer points if a camera does not shoot video or it has a smaller LCD screen or no high ISO boost. Apples and oranges, usually.

stan0301 Loc: Colorado

They all take pretty good pictures--unless you are using a $300 lens shade, a remote release, and a good tripod the degradation you are inducing almost certainly is greater than any difference between brands--that said, those degradations would be equal among all brands--so what is good, would still be better--but until you start getting big prints I doubt you are going to see even that. What happens is you will buy something, start getting lenses--and at that point changing brands makes very little sense.
Stan

cecilia delacroix Loc: near Seattle

The review responses that drive me crazy are the ones on amazon, et al: "This camera has really improved the quality of my images!"......and seeing that the 1-sentence review was "helpful" to 5 out of 6 people!

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

As others have said, dpreview is a good source for reviews, but you have to look at a variety because one will mention something that another might not. In considering a camera, there are several ways to look at it. You might be interested in a few particular features, like HDR, GPS, panorama, or something else. Any review can give you that information. The quality of the camera and the images it produces cannot be covered by anecdotal reference: "This is a really nice camera, and it takes great pictures." For that, you need the technical know-how to analyze the camera and its images.

When you ask an owner about his camera, you are practically guaranteed a good review. Unless the camera is a piece of junk, he is going to like it. Will he tell you that he made a mistake in spending $2,000 for his camera? Probably not. I read technical reviews that cover specifications and features. What the camera can do and how well it does it are all that matter. A reviewer's opinion of the shape or color or how comfortable it is to hold, don't matter to me.

I find CNET to be a waste of time on all levels. They send me a weekly email with a question. For example, "What is the best way to back up your computer?" Then they present answers from anyone who wants to write in. Waste of time.

oldmalky Loc: West Midlands,England.

As i dont intend to buy a new camera i dont waste my time reading the reviews?? not when the points against are, the price (as compared to a P&S)or no viewfinder(as compared to a DSLR)or its heavier than a nikon/sony/canon.or the view screen is smaller,the iso dont go as high, I remember reading where the price, if more expensive,earns a minus mark or weight is less earns a plus.

Dlevon Loc: New Jersey

I also like to read what people who own the camera say about it. I've read professional reviews in which I was wondering if I was looking at the same camera they were reviewing. They couldn't possibly have held it in their hands and looked at it. Too small reviews I discard. Too long reviews I also discard. I read the review that's just right, like the 3 bears! Lately you can't believe anything you read.

pounder35 Loc: "Southeast of Disorder"

What used to be photo magazines are now just catalogs with a few exceptions. Very few. Mostly advertising. The reviews probably lean towards who is spending the most ad $$$$$. Same with outdoor magazines. Mariah/Outside was great in the early 70's. Now it's just a catalog for North Face, Columbia, and Patagonia. A few nice pics and an occasional good story but that's the exception. Backpacker is just as bad. I quit subscribing years ago to all of them. :thumbdown:

Dlevon Loc: New Jersey

I agree most of the magazines are just getting to be advertising and commercials for equipment. I have also stopped subscribing to most of them. The only one I still have Is shutterbug, which is decent but that's going that way too.