And, amazingly, DP Review thinks it's wonderful! Just as Bryan did. So, the only Review nay-sayer ironically is Robbie Nikon aka Rob Galbraith. Isn't it about time folks realized that he's just a Nikon shill. His job is to attack Canon's credibility in his area of photographic specialty and nobody but him and a few other photographers have either the equipment needs he has or the corporate support to taint his "reviews".
Maybe some "professional" photographers will believe Robbie's tripe but most will take their investment in Canon lenses and realize that the Mark IV is a very, very good action camera that, in most cases, exceeds the demands of the person holding it. In fact, in most cases, it exceeds the skill of the person holding it[].
Jim
Originally Posted by jimgarvie
HMMM, Just goes to show, you always have to consider the source. I still see more white lenses on NFL sidelines, Than I do black lenses. Case and point.
Bob
Bob
Here is an interesting discussion (thru' comments)
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/1d-mark-iv-review-dpreview/
you may wish to have a look
Jim, you should be careful how you phrase your disagreement with the "nay-sayers," e.g., Galbraith, and others. It was his assessment of the Mark III's performance that highlighted its autofocus issues, which Byran also reported on. Canon struggled to fix this issue, but not to everyone's satisfaction. It appears that it hasn't been completely resolved in the MkIV, according to Galbraith. Should he not do a review of it, as he would use it?
On what basis do you say that he is a shill for Nikon? Or, that it "his job is to attack Canon's credibility?"
All reviews are biased and they don't cover everything. For a sports photographer like Galbraith, he's reporting what he's observed.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote