matthew miller Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 <p>I do hope a corrected version of the review goes up. The white balance comparison (where the K-7 shone) was interesting. I know the auto wb on my K-7 is superb, but it's interesting to see how the others do.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkpix Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 <p>Peter Bargh:<br> Thanks for taking a stand-up approach on this. Too many web sites have sacrificed credibility in their product reviews and I appreciate the fact that you reacted quickly to pull a flawed review from your site.<br> Good job.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricardovaste Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 <p>Okay, okay, I understand that the review wasn't "fair" in most peoples eyes, but that is just what it is - a review. You have to take it for what it is, but I understand why it frustrates a few of you, don't worry..</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyanatic Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 <blockquote> <p ><a name="00X9Ec"></a><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=2072536">Richard Harris</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/1roll.gif" alt="" /></a>, Aug 25, 2010; 12:38 p.m.</p> </blockquote> <blockquote> <p>Okay, okay, I understand that the review wasn't "fair" in most peoples eyes, but that is just what it is - a review. You have to take it for what it is, but I understand why it frustrates a few of you, don't worry..</p> </blockquote> Steve</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
personalphotos Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 <p>To the mods, Since the site has taken action to put a more balanced review togther at some point and addresses the comments we posted here, I think it's only fair that we close the thread. They did the right thing, now we should as well.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c_wyatt Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 <p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=778231">Peter Bargh</a>, thanks for taking the time to reply to us who had issues with the test. I don't think you could do much more after publishing than pulling the test and explaining how it was bogus, but many eds wouldn't have, so cheers.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebs Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 <p>Glad to see the integrity of the publisher not compromised.<br> It's one thing to have varying opinions, and even test on features that may favor one manufacturer. And a fact or two wrong can be corrected.<br> But to commit so many errors, and clearly show no experience with a camera or attempt to read its manual to understand modes, now that's just totally going to destroy any comparison attempt.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tofan_akbar Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 <p>the link now says:<br>Sorry the comparison test that you are looking for has been taken down due to inconsistencies in the review procedure. You may like to look at our individual <a href="http://www.ephotozine.com/article/Pentax-K7-11613">review of the Pentax K7</a></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now