The curious disappearance of Vid Gear Hawking Youtubers
- Thread starter mcbob
- Start date
NorBro
Major Contributor
The luxury of reviews we have is unprecedented. Depending on the product, endless amounts of breakdowns and perspectives may be found.
Not every style or personality or delivery of information will work for everyone - and you'll have to filter misinformation at times yourself - but I'll take this kind of life of data over a CNET write-up on AOL 20 years ago anytime.
Not every style or personality or delivery of information will work for everyone - and you'll have to filter misinformation at times yourself - but I'll take this kind of life of data over a CNET write-up on AOL 20 years ago anytime.
Peter C.
Veteran
If I do have an issue with these reviews are often misleading. Camera Conspiracies was poking fun at Fuji reviews. Now he knows for a fact their AF isn't good yet these reviewers are saying there are no issues and AF performs great and shows samples.
The first trick employed was filming a wide angle shot of seagulls at the beach, the dof was so large no matter what bird it picked it would be in focus. The next trick was to show only the data overlaid recording which shows the green tracking box flawlessly following the subject. The problem with these cameras tracking doesn't mean it is in focus.
This goes beyond not mentioning the camera AF is a weakness or down playing it they're actually setting up a test to make it seem there is no weakness. This would be an example of more info isn't better or helpful.
Finally even when the reviews are valid, they can put you into a state of paralyse if you're trying to make a purchase. One person says its terrible, the next says it's brilliant and another says its flawed but an incredible value.
The first trick employed was filming a wide angle shot of seagulls at the beach, the dof was so large no matter what bird it picked it would be in focus. The next trick was to show only the data overlaid recording which shows the green tracking box flawlessly following the subject. The problem with these cameras tracking doesn't mean it is in focus.
This goes beyond not mentioning the camera AF is a weakness or down playing it they're actually setting up a test to make it seem there is no weakness. This would be an example of more info isn't better or helpful.
Finally even when the reviews are valid, they can put you into a state of paralyse if you're trying to make a purchase. One person says its terrible, the next says it's brilliant and another says its flawed but an incredible value.
Last edited:
NorBro
Major Contributor
Any reviewer who actually thinks non-Sony/Canon AF works great probably genuinely thinks it works great because of bad eyes/no attention-to-detail or doesn't know any better (like doesn't have experience with better AF).
All of the reviewers I've watched (for those other cameras) clearly say* the AF sometimes works and/or sometimes doesn't work (*usually based on the situation), which is actually the truth and is enough to satisfy both parties (companies and subs).
Some word it or edit around it better than others.
I always joked and said that I thought there was a timer installed in Panasonic cameras for the AF like there is [allegedly] in the R5 for overheating. Because sometimes a GH-whatever will work perfectly for 30-45 seconds and then suddenly it loses itself and it's never the same until minutes later (or it just refuses to work well in even the most simplest situations).
So if a reviewer uploads those aforementioned 30-45 seconds and says, "In this test it worked great!", that may be the truth although it's not being completely honest (like how about the other 15-20 clips that didn't make the edit, ha).
They play the game like anyone else does who's trying to survive.
All of the reviewers I've watched (for those other cameras) clearly say* the AF sometimes works and/or sometimes doesn't work (*usually based on the situation), which is actually the truth and is enough to satisfy both parties (companies and subs).
Some word it or edit around it better than others.
I always joked and said that I thought there was a timer installed in Panasonic cameras for the AF like there is [allegedly] in the R5 for overheating. Because sometimes a GH-whatever will work perfectly for 30-45 seconds and then suddenly it loses itself and it's never the same until minutes later (or it just refuses to work well in even the most simplest situations).
So if a reviewer uploads those aforementioned 30-45 seconds and says, "In this test it worked great!", that may be the truth although it's not being completely honest (like how about the other 15-20 clips that didn't make the edit, ha).
They play the game like anyone else does who's trying to survive.
These "subtleties" is indeed the way to give a (seemingly) positive review and keep getting gear while supplying the subscribers with the affiliate links and other commercial tie-in's. That's the way the game works.
Side note, looking at the comments section of the various rumors sites, they seem to be way, way down. Everyone's gone to YouTube and YouTube is squeezing everyone it can squeeze. It is a de facto monopoly and it's surely acting like one. I've mentioned before that I am stunned that other streamers don't try to appropriate the most popular YouTubers - some political ones left on their own accord - in order to leave the service with cat videos and the EPL/NHL highlights.
Side note, looking at the comments section of the various rumors sites, they seem to be way, way down. Everyone's gone to YouTube and YouTube is squeezing everyone it can squeeze. It is a de facto monopoly and it's surely acting like one. I've mentioned before that I am stunned that other streamers don't try to appropriate the most popular YouTubers - some political ones left on their own accord - in order to leave the service with cat videos and the EPL/NHL highlights.