Olympus D-400 Zoom: Disparity in Tests of Imaging Resource and PC Magazine

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Imaging Resource Discussion : One Thread

PC Magazine (Online) recently reviewed 20 digicams. http://www.zdnet.com/pcmag/features/digicam99/index.html

I was just about to buy a D-400 Zoom, partly based on the excellent review it received from Imaging Resouce (and the posted test pictures). Amazingly, PC Magazine said "it's hard to recommend this camera" and gave it ratings of "fair" in the home and business categories and "poor" in the semipro category.

I have not yet had a chance to take the online "test" offered by PC Magazine and judge for myself. Still, I am curious why the reviews from two sources are so different. PC Magazine gave the nod to Nikon's 900s, which is a fine camera, but I didn't expect the D-400 Zoom to finish so poorly in the magazine's test.

What gives -- site sponsorship pressures, testing methods?

Glenn K.

-- Glenn K. (lawman_911@hotmail.com), December 30, 1998

Answers

The PC Magazine methodology was flawed in several ways:

1) PCMag took a single situation - indoor shot with the auto-white compensation set to "flourescent" and compared the impressions of their testers. Unfortunately,"flourescent" lighting has a wide variance. The end result is the best picture selection went to the camera vendor that had the best color rendition for that one situation. (take their test and you will see that you will agree with that result). You can prove to yourself that the D400Z would come out at (or near) the top with a different "auto-white balance" setting. Since the D400Z was not even included in the sample test PCMag provides you will have to retrieve its image separately from the images in their test. Bring D400Z image into a "photoshop" utility and hit the Autobalance or adjust the colors and contrast levels your own preference, then compare that against the cameras that were included in the sample test. You'll be pleasantly surprised The D400Z stands up very well.

2) PCMag did not test images of landscapes, macro shots, portraits, nor action shots where the subject was moving in their comparative evaluation by their jury.

3) PCMag did not evaluate functions provided, ease of use, convenience, battery life, quality of workmanship, usefulness of manuals etc. As a footnote, Consumer Reports did a more thorough evaluation and rated the Olympus D340 just below the Nikon 900. The D400Z is similar in functionality and ease of use to the D340 but has better optical qualities - a zoom lens and other refinements. These would probably have pushed the D400Z to an equal spot with the Nikon 900s in the Consumer Report ratings.

4) At the Image Resource "comparator" you can observe resolution differences, color accuracy, and can get an idea of how much or little geometric distortion is introduced. PCMag did virtually nothing to evaluate these criteria. The 2 cameras are very close but I personally think the Nikon has the edge. (really the new Minolta has the edge over both of them.)

Both the Nikon 900s and the Olympus D400Z are wonderful cameras. There are feature differences that might make you favor one over the other. I like the convenience of the D400Z's Flashpath diskette for downloading the images and the smaller pocket-able snap shut case of the D400Z which protects the lens without neeading a lens cap. I like the Nikon's rotating lens connection, the smooth transition zoom from optical to digital zoom and the extra "flash" setting for white- balance beyond the indoor and outdoor options that both cameras provide. I also like the Nikon's CF memory capacity and the fact that it comes with a case.

It is too early to have statistics but the quality that would make me pick one over the other is the long term reliablity.

I like PC Mag and I trust their reviews most of the time. I had planned to order a D400Z for myself till I read the article. I chewed on it for a while, but decided that Image Resource and Consumer Reports did better jobs evaluating cameras, and I picked the D400Z anyway. If it holds up, I'm happy. If it spends its time in the repair shop I will be wishing I bought the Nikon.

-- Ben Gordon (bengordon@earthlink.net), January 02, 1999.


PC Magazine is not good for reviews of anything. Never trust them. I do use them...actually I'm a subscriber...but never trust them as your sole source of Info...Luckly today computer users have other resources such as the Web (Praise God..and a few Computer Scientists pardon me while I praise my profession)..and good magazines like Maximum PC (formally Boot)

As for digital Cameras PC Magazine has consistantly been horrible in reviewing them. The Imaging Resource is really a blessing for consumers in it's incredibly detailed, accurate, and consistant testing of Digicams.

My Current Impression is that the 400Z is a great camera and I'm looking to buy one ASAP. The minolta 1500 EX has also impressed me due to it's automatically richer results...yet apon closer inspection I have found the Minotla's images very "noisy". I'd rather have a cleaner picture that the Olympus provides and edit that myself in photoshop if it needs a little help here and there.

-- Andrew M. Valderas (rudeandy@wam.umd.edu), January 04, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ