> >If you accept that the target market of a camera will never get past >the default settings and expects that to produce the best photos for >average conditions and 4x6 prints, that's fine. State that, test and >evaluate on that basis: produce a set of 4x6 prints after taking >pictures with your test rig and default settings and compare the prints. > >If, however, you assume the market space the camera is targeted for >to be as above and test the same camera on its default settings, and >THEN examine the results on screen at 1:1 pixel resolution, complain >about micro-edge softness and/or other stuff, or about short gamma >curve or whatever ... and particularly when you know that just >changing one or two simple settings would give dramatically different- >better results for that kind of evaluation ... then you are >contradicting your test assumptions with your analyses and presenting >misinformation: the testing assumptions and basis of evaluation are >addressing two different kinds of potential users. > >Godfrey >
I understand your point. I would guess that they're trying to connect with both kinds of users. I do often see them tell the other side of the story... we didn't like this, but... Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
