dkCambridgeshire Posted July 28, 2013 Share #1 Posted July 28, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Has anyone read AP magazine's X Vario test report published this week? I have not seen it yet but subscribers and Londoners usually have their copies earlier than the usual Tuesday publication day. It'll be interesting to read the reviewer's opinion of the camera's 'imaging' and lens specification - especially the latter bearing in mind all the previous criticism of same from the naysayers on this forum. dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 28, 2013 Posted July 28, 2013 Hi dkCambridgeshire, Take a look here AP magazine's X Vario test report ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest Posted July 28, 2013 Share #2 Posted July 28, 2013 Has anyone read AP magazine's X Vario test report published this week? I have not seen it yet but subscribers and Londoners usually have their copies earlier than the usual Tuesday publication day. It'll be interesting to read the reviewer's opinion of the camera's 'imaging' and lens specification - especially the latter bearing in mind all the previous criticism of same from the naysayers on this forum. dunk AP = amateur photographer? see the link to > "sean raid" leica tests <. SR is one of the X-Vario reviewer. br kmhb Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted July 28, 2013 Author Share #3 Posted July 28, 2013 AP = amateur photographer? see the link to > "sean raid" leica tests <. SR is one of the X-Vario reviewer. br kmhb Yes ... AP is 'Amateur Photographer' . The Sean Reid reviews have been mentioned in previous forum posts. The AP reviews of Leica products are usually ... 'interesting' .. say no more dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted July 28, 2013 Share #4 Posted July 28, 2013 Yes, mine arrived yesterday Dunk. I thought Ian Farrell produced a well-balanced report, speaking as a non-owner at present. Some of the illustrations were not too well reproduced and, considering it is a camera review, I would expect at least one larger size picture taken with the review camera. So my judgment is on text and data alone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted July 28, 2013 Author Share #5 Posted July 28, 2013 Yes, mine arrived yesterday Dunk. I thought Ian Farrell produced a well-balanced report, speaking as a non-owner at present. Some of the illustrations were not too well reproduced and, considering it is a camera review, I would expect at least one larger size picture taken with the review camera. So my judgment is on text and data alone. Thank you David ... and sounds like you might be considering buying one? Look forward to reading the review on Tuesday when copies are available here. dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted July 30, 2013 Author Share #6 Posted July 30, 2013 Just bought AP magazine; the test report is very favourable and of particular note the reviewer states: "JPEGS are some of the best we've seen straight from the camera" " ... zoom lens ... an excellent performer. At whatever aperture or zoom setting images are sharp from edge to edge ..." " ... performs well at higher ISOs ..." The camera's autofocus was found to struggle in some situations but manual focus was "very usable and offers a real alternative to working with AF" All in all a very fair 6 page review and the magazine is well worth buying just for this test report especially if you are contemplating investing in the camera. The review certainly shows that most of the naysayers' negative comments were and are wishful bunkum ... those naysayers failed to foresee the fact that quality images are the norm at every combination of zoom, ISO (up to and even beyond 3200) and aperture settings. Best wishes dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
miatadan Posted July 30, 2013 Share #7 Posted July 30, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Not sure why AP magazine's state: polycarbonate, except for an aluminium top plate, when on Leica site I read "For instance, the top plate is machined from solid aluminum in the same process as that used for the Leica M. The magnesium and aluminum body feels comfortably solid in the hand. At the same time, soft leather trim lends the Leica X Vario reassuring grip characteristics." Dan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted July 30, 2013 Author Share #8 Posted July 30, 2013 Not sure why AP magazine's state: polycarbonate, except for an aluminium top plate, when on Leica site I read "For instance, the top plate is machined from solid aluminum in the same process as that used for the Leica M. The magnesium and aluminum body feels comfortably solid in the hand. At the same time, soft leather trim lends the Leica X Vario reassuring grip characteristics." Dan AP reviewer is also wrong about the X1 camera allegedly having a 28mm lens ... see page 45 dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhsimmonds Posted July 31, 2013 Share #9 Posted July 31, 2013 AP reviewer is also wrong about the X1 camera allegedly having a 28mm lens ... see page 45 dunk My view of the AP reviews went down the toilet after a very poor verdict on the Leica R9/DMR review some years ago. The review was conducted and written by Damian Demolder I seem to remember. Damian is now the editor of AP! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted July 31, 2013 Author Share #10 Posted July 31, 2013 My view of the AP reviews went down the toilet after a very poor verdict on the Leica R9/DMR review some years ago. The review was conducted and written by Damian Demolder I seem to remember. Damian is now the editor of AP! Yes I remember that review and the comments it provoked. We tend to refer to magazines' reviews as 'AP's review' or 'BJP's review' but at the end of the day it's the actual reviewer's opinion which is published. Those opinions can be biased, full of unnecessary preamble/waffle and they can convey more about the reviewer than the camera. The preamble can be a total waste of valuable page space and just an excuse for the the reviewer to wax lyrical about irrelevancies. Why can't reviewers get into the nitty gritty of a camera's or lens' attributes and performance a bit quicker without the unnecessary journalese full of the same predictably overused phraseology used in their previous reviews? Thankfully, Ian Farrell's X Vario review in this week's magazine is a breath of fresh air and a very much more readable, objective and comprehensive report than some of AP's previous assessments - and I doubt if it required much 'editing' Best wishes dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted July 31, 2013 Share #11 Posted July 31, 2013 Dunk - Some periodicals pay the writers by the word, much as Dickens experienced. Perhaps that has soemthing to do with your observation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted July 31, 2013 Author Share #12 Posted July 31, 2013 Dunk - Some periodicals pay the writers by the word, much as Dickens experienced. Perhaps that has soemthing to do with your observation. Yes ... there is more to magazine articles than meets the eye. I live in Peterborough where one of the main industries is magazine publishing. It's a fascinating business and what ends up on the printed page is a product which not only has to inform readers but also has to earn the journalists their bread and butter. I have attended presentations and lectures by Peterborough based magazine editors and journalists who enlightened the audiences about how articles are actually written and published - so I bear in mind some of those 'secrets' whenever I read an article. However, I was impressed by Ian Farrell's X Vario article (apart from the mistake about the X2 camera's focal length) because of its candour and impartiality and the way it informs readers without bias and unnecessary embroidery. The latter can be so evident in other magazines' reviews. dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted July 31, 2013 Share #13 Posted July 31, 2013 Some periodicals pay the writers by the word, much as Dickens experienced. Perhaps that has soemthing to do with your observation. In my experience (not with AP or BJP though) you get paid for what gets published, not for what you have written. Editors can be quite merciless in cutting from your copy when it doesn’t fit the available space. I never had any difficulty filling that space; usually I was fighting to cram in everything I deemed essential in what little space I was given. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted August 1, 2013 Share #14 Posted August 1, 2013 Michael - That's my experience, too, and I should have said, "paid by the published and edited word." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.