> I disagree, Ken. The viewers or readers have to be able to trust the
> reviewer. If there had been problems with the test camera the reviewer
> should have said so, qualified, if necessary, with the "pre-production
> software" warning.
Except the problem here is that if a reviewer does a proper job of
skewering the camera, he/she will never get another one to review. I
will trust Andrew's ventage here over his published review anyday.
Michael Richtmann has alluded to this disaster of a camera already but
has withheld his own review so far. This might be an attempt on his
part to allow Fuji to get some things fixed before he launches into
scorched-earth mode.
> As you have said a couple of times, the software and OS are integral to the
> device.
And what has been very apparant now is that the camera companies won't
fix anything once it is released. Whatever bugs you see are baked in
and never will be fixed. Sure, they'll do ONE software fix, but no
more since a new model of camera comes out before the second software
fix would be released. By that time, they have taken the attitude that
you should buy the latest camera anyway.
The ONLY exception to this that I'm aware of was Konica-Minolta. Their
dying gasp act before the camera division was disolved and sucked into
Sony was releasing a software update to the A-series cameras that
fixed pretty much everything and increased write performance so much
that it turned it into a new camera. The revised A1 runs circles
around the much higher-spec E-1.
Oh, one glaring exception with Olympus. The E-5 won't run tethered.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|