[net.rec.photo] Ratings of photo equipment

ddb@mrvax.DEC (05/19/85)

I also have some qualms about Consumer's Reports ratings of photographic
equipment.  Remember, however, that they are rating the equipment for the
general audience, not for serious camera buffs or gadget freaks.

I also have some serious problems with the camera magazine ratings of 
equipment.  In particular, their results are based on examination of one
sample, and a sample that as far as I know isn't chosen at random from the
normal distribution channels.  How much can you determine from one sample?
One of the biggest aspects of "quality" in a lens, for example, is
consistency from sample to sample.  Can't tell much about that from
examining just one!

What I do find especially useful in the photo magazine ratings is their
subjective evaluations from field-test use, and their examination of the
techniques of construction of the camera.  This last should give considerable
information about susceptibility to various kinds of abuse.

		--  David Dyer-Bennet
		-- ...decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-mrvax!ddb