Magazine reviews - are they to be trusted?

[markta]

Hi peeps,

Was amazed to look at the latest Digital Photographer mag, where they carried out a review of five tripods.

The Manfrotto 190 MF4 came out first, ahead of a basalt Gitzo. The Manfrotto got 10 out of 10. the Gitzo 9.

This was an overall rating. I find that hard to believe as the Manfrotto is possibly better value for money, but the Gitzo more sturdy and lightweight and if anything, should have got equal marks..

My question is....is there an element of back scratching when reviewing products, like financial inducements etc? I just have a gut feeling

 

[dod]

My own belief is that you can't really trust them although they do provide a useful reference. I'll go a stage further and say I don't really trust user reviews either for the simple reason that nobody really wants to say they made a bad choice. Bit of a generalisation though

 

[strobemonkey]

Most are obviously biased.

 

[Joe T]

I trust AP fairly well.

 

[Mike Hoyer]

9/10 or 10/10 both sound pretty well reccomended to me. I'd get the one you like best.

 

[PsiFox]

Reviews are merely the personal opinion of the writer using his criteria to define the ability of a product.

That is why they can be so different to other reviews.

 

[Nicos Rex]

Reviews consist of 2 elements - they all are partly factual and partly opinion.

On the whole, unless the reviewer has made an honest mistake you are pretty safe on the factual part.

The opinion part is more tricky - not only does the reviewer bring his own experience and prejudice to the table there are financial pressures. These are not, of course, direct bribery but are far more subtle than this. The most important is the fact that any publication only has 2 sources of revenue, circulation and advertising. It would be a brave reviewer and editor who published an explicitly very negative review of a new product from a major advertiser.

On the other hand, they will be well aware that if they describe a turd as a gold ingot they will lose credibility with their readership and ultimately lose circulation (and as a consequence advertising revenue as well).

This dilemma is as old as publishing and there are a number of ways around it for the reviewer, the most common are to gloss over (or completely omit) negative points, or to "damn with faint praise".

This means that you need to treat reviews with care - sort out the fact from the opinion and then look at the products yourself in that light.

 

[apkent]

The problem also is how long they have the items in their posession whilst they write the review.

At the end of the day, a monopod is a stick, with some clips and a handle. How much can go wrong and other than cost and weight, I don't imagine there being much to choose between two sticks. The thing I want to know about it longevity, but a reviewer will never have an item long enough to comment on this so I rely on forums a little more.

That said, I rely on forums for reviews on most things now - you get a good idea of a product when half a dozen people have come on and said something about it although all the while bearing in mind they rarely want to be negative on their own purchase.