Unfortunately, there was an error in the test that was printed. An earlier version of the last two pages of my test was sent to press and not the final version. It happened whilst I was away on a press trip and I only found out on my return when it was too late.
The ‘It’s All Relative’ podium and the scores were based on my original thoughts of the camera, before AP’s technical team had all sat down to discuss the cameras – as we always do following a test. Unfortunately, the original text was accidentally sent to print, rather than the final version.
After discussing the camera at length in context with other models, we decided to award the Olympus E-520 85% and the E-420 83% (not the 86% and 84% printed in the magazine). The mark that was lost on each camera was from the image quality section. This was done to bring it into line with the scores awarded to other cameras on the market.
We also discussed the cameras in question as a whole, and decided the all round performance of the EOS 450D was so significantly better that it should be placed ahead of the other cameras, even though it had scored lower for image quality. We agreed that, at this end of the market, image quality is of less crucial importance than it is in higher end models.
As a result, and realising the Canon EOS 450D actually scored lower for image quality, the ‘It’s All Relative’ text was changed to emphasise the 450D’s all-round performance as the reason it was our preferred camera – not the image quality. The positions of the cameras on the podium remain unchanged.
We realise that this may have caused some confusion and would like to take this opportunity to apologise.
Post Extras
Entire topic
Subject
Posted by
Posted on
Error in Olympus E-520 and E-420 Review (AP 5 July 2008)
Previous
Index
Next
Flat
Error in Olympus E-520 and E-420 Review (AP 5 July 2008)
Edit
Reply
Quote
