JPL wrote:
No, this is by far the worst website to compare cameras, they are not fair, they are not honest, they do not base their comparisons on facts or specs, they are lazy and their comparisons are worthless. The trend that you will see if you investigate their comparisons carefully is that older cameras are always better than new cameras. Do you really think that is true?
If we look at the comparison you are doing, Sony A7II vs Nikon D7200, the Nikon gets 50 points for popularity and Sony gets 5. This popularity has only to do with the age of the camera. The older a camera gets, the more accumulated lookup's does it have on the internet, and that is how they decide that the Nikon is so much better than the Sony because this number alone accounts for about 90% of the difference of the cameras. And what does this popularity have to do with the quality of the camera in any way? It is not like this is even reflecting how many cameras have been sold. This number should not be in such comparison at all. This is to explain how they always rate older cameras higher than newer.
Another thing in the score is that the Nikon gets 40,9 points for image quality, the Sony gets 0. That basically means that when Snapsort was testing the Sony it did not deliver any images at all as I understand it. But we know that is not possible unless they were too lazy to put a battery in it so I guess they were lazy and did not bother to take any pics to check the image quality or look it up at any other real website that has this info, they did not even bother to use the numbers from the last model temporarily if no numbers were available for the new model. So they just say that the Sony does not make any images at all. This is neither fair or honest and lazy too because they are not looking for the most important information they are basing their score on. So they are not fair and honest, but they are lazy. And in their evaluation this is the second most important score for a camera.
And there is a lot more about the cameras they are not comparing at all, info that is useful for the possible buyer of a camera, some would be in favor of Nikon, other of Sony. But it really does not matter because Snapsort is a Snapcrap when it comes to camera comparison.
No, this is by far the worst website to compare ca... (
show quote)
The problem with Snapsort is not lack of honesty, but the fact that the generated results are entirely automated, with virtually no human input. Someone initially enters the data for each camera, and software does all the rest. Bad programming? Sure. When data is missing, it comes up negative or borrows data from a previous model. Then of course the comparision results are faulty and scores are skewed and meaningless. And there's no one on the other end making corrections to missing or faulty data either. If Snapsort incorrectly claims your DSLR does not have a viewfinder, three years later it still says the camera does not have a viewfinder! Although we like to believe there's a real person creating the scores for us, in reality it's just software doing it.