Yes, and advertising revenue can make or break a magazine or other publication. And if the review copy of a camera or lens is provided directly from the manufacturer, there is no reason to believe that its performance is representative of the ones that went down the line just before and just after it...that it hasn't been "tweaked" to perform (or measure) better than the typical one bought at retail.

While reviews aren't necessarily evil, they must be considered carefully along with information from other sources.

One of the greats in photography declared that to test a camera he looked out his NY office window and took a few shots and looked at them. Scientific lens charts and other tests can be tilted toward the strengths or weaknesses of various lenses.Particularly zooms are variable as you well know. And high ISOs can produce artifacts under different conditions and tests can be slanted to favor on camera over another since nearly all critiques compare models. The thread is not a trick--it is to find people who disagree with critics about cameras they own and why.----ew

No, IMHO, critics CANNOT make or break a new camera model.
I have my own mind and read multiple reviews, you will always find some bias in ANY review. You have to take the highs and lows and see what's in the middle.
ie. Don't believe everything you read on the internet, newspaper, magazine, or any where.
I have found if I follow my common sense I am rarely wrong.
Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.
Bottom line, a competent photographer can capture great images with most any modern digital camera.

My take on this. Not all reviewers are paid. If the reviewer has big hands he could find lets say a mirrorless camera inconvenient, which is not for a person with small hands. The placement of certain switches or buttons in a camera a reviewer could find annoying while it is a godsend for someone else.
The same goes with lenses, some reviewers like a lens and it could be not what the doctor ordered for another. All wide angles are going to have distortions, all zooms are going to have optical compromises, primes are going to have a fixed focal length and not all of them are going to be exceptionally sharp. With a prime zoom is made by coming closer or stepping away from the subject.

I remember the tests made on cameras and lenses by the Modern Photography staff. I ignore how they made those tests but when they tested the first version of the 24-120 lens made by Nikon they claimed professionals used it because of its sharpness. Well, we all know many reviewers did not agree with them. I used one of them, it was a good lens but not outstanding as Modern Photography called it. If the magazine altered their testing to favor a company I do not know. I tend to not rely on reviewers that I know are paid although I admit they tend to be honest but not always. If I am interested in a lens or a camera I tend to test it before buying and when that is not possible I read the reviews of photographers like you and me that have used the product and even so I do have a critical eye. The 17 mm f2.8 Zuiko for micro fourth thirds cameras has a great review from Olympus but the majority of reviewers claim it is not a good lens. I bought mine practically brand new, maybe the previous owner read the unfavorable reviews and sold it but the lens has been an excellent performer in my Olympus bodies.

So, my advise, try to test a camera or lens before buying or get independent reviews then decide if the camera or lens is for you. A good advise, do not buy a lens because it is sharp buy what you need for your photographic style. Do not buy a camera with a lot of bells and whistles buy the camera you feel comfortable with and what will do what you want from it. Be your own reviewer.

If someone buys the cameras with their own money and reviews and posts their results for your review, many times, for free to you, what are you going to do, not trust your own lying eyes? You can always buy the equipment yourself, if you're so much smarter and wealthy. Start your own review website, build the better mousetrap.

It's rather easy to make everything into a Conspiracy when you don't know anything about how things work. Does the sun still travel around the turtle holding up the earth?

If you read the reviewer's profile and background, you can start to remove the veils and blinders from your eyes and step into a bright and shiny world of knowledge and understanding. If still you think there's a bias, account for that bias or change who you spend your time reading. Or again, buy the equipment and do the work yourself. BTW - there are some rather well-respected reviewers that are widely known to be bias-against certain brands. Do you have problems with their credibility too?

Canon----I made no comment---merely tossed out the subject. We know that political critics follow their publishers' views or get fired. Why not in camera views? And the old adage---those who cannot do---teach? So---this fishing post was to find people who bought against the reviews and were satisfied. In photography---a reviewer is most often a comparison critic, not merely a"reviewer." How many political journalists are merely reporting "only the news without a slant?"----ew

But I will give a case study about a concept camera introduced by Sony about twenty years ago. It was a mirrorless marvel way ahead of it's time. The series were considered Bridge cameras between pro and consumer. The concept was to take an excellent Zeiss tele Sonnar 28-200mm and couple it with a swivelling mirrorless body and giving the camera other features such as video and infra-red night vision as well as night vision plus built in flash plus hot shoe. The DSC F717 was favorably received so Sony continued by increasing the sensor to 8mpixels (3264x2448 size raw and *.tif files of 23megabytes) and making a special 4 color sensitivity. Then the reviews went sour and they dropped the entire line of mirrorless which twenty years ago were ahead of the times. It listed for about $1000. at the time. Below is a phtoto of this last of the line---the DSC F828---8 megapixel---videoo--infra-red ergonomic swivel lens marvel---the last in the series thanks to the poor reviews. But I enjoy mine greatly. Also it uses CF as well as Sony cards and runs an hour and a half on a charge. And the color rendition is excellent for a Bayer with the added 4 colors.----photo attached.

Canon----I made no comment---merely tossed out the subject. We know that political critics follow their publishers' views or get fired. Why not in camera views? And the old adage---those who cannot do---teach? So---this fishing post was to find people who bought against the reviews and were satisfied. In photography---a reviewer is most often a comparison critic, not merely a"reviewer." How many political journalists are merely reporting "only the news without a slant?"----ew