There's only so much you can stick in a few pages in print. Sometimes
they have additional stuff on their site.
Chuck Norcutt
Winsor Crosby wrote:
> Had a chance to thumb through the article at the newstand. The
> rankings seem decent at least as far as the models I know something
> about. Possibly I missed it, but I thought it really odd, especially
> considering their audience looking for guidance, that there was no
> serious discussion of viewfinders except for the LCD kind. No
> discussion that the whole point of an SLR is to see what the lens
> sees. No discussion of the quality of DSLR viewfinders and no separate
> rating for them, or at least a statement that the differences were
> inconsequential.
>
>
>
> Winsor
> Long Beach, California, USA
>
>
>
>
> On May 31, 2008, at 5:10 PM, Moose wrote:
>
>> Over the years, I've found more amusement than enlightenment in
>> Consumer
>> Reports reviews of cameras.
>>
>> This year, they have changed test methods and added software and
>> 'expert' evaluations.
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 269.24.6/1480 - Release Date: 6/3/2008
> 7:00 AM
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|