Negative product reviews

[colonel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Very interesting read, especially section 6, on information regarding negative reviews which are dominated by those who don't/won't purchase (or by implication have no experience) of the product

 

http://web.mit.edu/simester/Public/Papers/Deceptive_Reviews.pdf

 

Insight into X-Vario and other negative reviews

[IkarusJohn]

Unless I missed something (I confess to only skimming the paper), the review is restricted to online reviews as part of customer feedback, and the underlying assumption in the paper is that giving a negative review of something you have not bought is misleading, or is behaviour to be discouraged, or is somehow wrong.

 

The paper also acknowledges that a very small percentage of customers leave reviews and of them an even smaller percentage leave negative reviews of products they have not bought - they refer to this as the tail of the tail. They explain this behaviour as customers seeing themselves as "brand ambassadors".

 

If you examine purchaser behaviour, let's start with the assumption that the purchaser is interested in the product (otherwise, their behaviour would be completely perverse and would not feature as more than a blip in any statistical analysis). So, if they are interested, they will find out about the product - to varying degrees, they will look images of the product, review its technical information, look at sample output, for a view about performance, consider price, and read the reviews of others. They will then, we assume, either buy or not buy the product. Some might try before they buy, but the paper was about online purchasing, as I read it.

 

The paper then acknowledges that a small percentage will post a review, and an even smaller percentage (those who did not buy) will also post a review.

 

Why is that a bad thing?

 

I would hazard that it will be a small percentage who buy, admit they are unhappy with the purchase and will then post a review - they will more than likely sell, and move on; unless of course they are brand ambassadors.

 

Move on to Leica, as a camera company, I would also hazard that it inspires passion (brand loyalty) more than any other camera manufacturer - certainly on this forum.

 

Is it at all surprising, therefore, that a new Leica product captures people's imaginations? If you add the "mini M" label, then people sit up and take notice. The M is special. So when the product is released, initially only the specs and a picture are available - that washes out those expecting a "mini M", with a bit of disappointment mixed with irritation at being misled.

 

The next stage is a mix of new people who missed or didn't really care one way or the other about the "mini M" hype, those with an open mind, and those who were disappointed, but had a look anyway - hey, it's a Leica! Of that mixed group, there will also be buyers and non-buyers.

 

Of all those non-buyers, I would suggest that a higher percentage than in the study will share their disappointment, or the reasons they reject the product, particularly among the brand ambassadors. So, for me, the assumption in the paper that there is a problem with people posting negative reviews about products they chose not to buy - the other way round would be a little odd, don't you think?

 

If I understand your point, only people who own the camera should express a view on it?

 

Makes no sense to me, I'm sorry Harold.

[Ruhayat]

I think if people have tried something, maybe even bought it (or not), find that they don't like it, and then comment on it based on their experience with it, that's fair.

 

And then there are those who have never tried it, have only read about it on the Internet, decided somehow that they are not interested in it because the specs means it would be such and such a camera therefore not worth checking out in person, yet comment on what it can and cannot do with such gusto. What is their opinion based on other than conjecture and hearsay?

 

With the X-Vario, there were a fair few in the second group, BEFORE the camera started shipping. Frustration with the M Mini debacle is understandable. But they then still maintained their opinions on what the camera is or isn't, without experiencing it, after the camera came out.

[250swb]

It's to do with perspective.

 

I'm stupid and because it is fast and comfortable I plan to buy a Rolls Royce to pull my plough across the field. I obviously could do with some advice, but do I need to wait for some negative feedback from a similar idiot who has already done the same thing? I think anybody who doesn't have a Rolls Royce, yet knows the brand, could have told me that a tractor would be better.

 

Similarly photographers who know the brand make choices on new purchases based on that knowledge, possibly from years and years of experience. To say why you are not buying something can be just as revealing as commenting 'I wish I hadn't bought it' in negative feedback. In fact it may save people a lot of money, save them from costly mistakes that make them turn negative about the brand overall, not just one product. You only need to read enough posts in other forums before you eventually find the comments like 'I tried a Leica once and found it was no better than my Nikon', to realise that it only takes one bad experience to stop people completely.

 

So it is better to take some perspective, broaden out the criteria, and not only say why you wouldn't buy something, but warn people of any expensive pitfalls they hadn't anticipated. Negative comment can be the kindest thing to do, the most caring human response, because the alternative, the 'fanboy' response, is often largely based on joining the club, being in the band, all playing the same tune while the ship sinks.

 

Steve

[colonel]

It's to do with perspective.

 

I'm stupid and because it is fast and comfortable I plan to buy a Rolls Royce to pull my plough across the field. I obviously could do with some advice, but do I need to wait for some negative feedback from a similar idiot who has already done the same thing? I think anybody who doesn't have a Rolls Royce, yet knows the brand, could have told me that a tractor would be better.

 

 

I think you are missing the point of the article.

No one is expecting someone looking for a boat to buy a plane.

 

It makes two major points.

1. People think that negative comments are more intelligent, therefore those looking for admiration sometimes try to be as negative as possible.

2. The most negative comments tend to come from those self-appointed "brand ambassadors" who have no experience of the product but are using the review as a platform to get their personal dislikes off their chest.

 

This fits perfectly with the X-vario launch.

It's a high quality camera with a class leading lens that is only costing 30% more then the X2 for a wider feature set.

However the X-vario was viciously attacked by people with no experience of it, for not being what they personally wanted.

I don't desire a Phase one back but I am happy to admit it's a great device and not particularly going to bother writing a review saying the Phase one back is rubbish as it doesn't include a lens !!

[Ruhayat]

Reviews are supposed to be findings borne out of trying the item being discussed. If one has never tried the item, it is an opinion. Nothing wrong with expressing contrarian opinions for the sake of check and balance, and presenting cons for potential buyers to consider. But...

 

What I find amazing and perplexing about the X Vario brouhaha is how opinion based on conjecture (alright, let's call it "hyopthesis") is assumed to trump direct experience. Surely the smart way would be to form a hypothesis, and then test it to see whether the theory stands.

 

In the case of the X Vario, there were some recurring hypothesis put forth as potential cons:

1. The lens is too slow, therefore cannot possibly take good photos (esp in low light)

2. The lens is slow AND big compared to the competition

3. The whole thing is too slow, big AND costs a lot more than the competition

 

Hypothesis 1 has been proven somewhat false by people who tested it and presented documentary evidence. But these were, again perplexingly, pooh-poohed by people who, again, have never tried it themselves.

 

The second part of Hypothesis 2 has also been debunked, even before the camera shipped. I did a quick research and found that the X Vario zoom is smaller than any other APS-C mirrorless zoom out there.

 

The first part of Hypothesis 2 is, while true, turns out to be inconsequential in direct testing by user:

a. the X Vario lens is sharp wide open, whereas the other "faster" zooms need to be stopped down the usual 2 stops.

b. in reality, the X Vario zoom is actually only a half stop slower than most other APS-C mirrorless zooms in the wide end, and 2/3 stops slower in the longer end. As has been demonstrated by actual tests, this is more than compensated for by the fact that one could jack up the ISO to attain fast shutter speeds.

 

Hypothesis 3 is the one that bemuses me the most. The first and second portions are evidently untrue. The third "argument" - that it's supposedly inferior yet costs more than the competition - is a funny one to make: if it really does hold true, then no one in their right mind would buy any product from Leica. None whatsoever.

[Ruhayat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

To me all that should matter is, forget the specs and the theories: how does it perform? Does it deliver what it is designed to do (that is, high quality images)? Does it feel good in the hand while doing that? These are questions that only a direct experience with the product could answer.

 

Depending on prior knowledge really has no effect on the product in question. Just because the M5 was a sales failure, for instance, doesn't mean Leica should stop coming out with cameras that have TTL metering. Just an example.

[pgk]

Having had experience in dealing with buyers of fairly technical consumer.pro gear I generally divide such people into two categories:

 

The first group (including myself) have a set of requirements which the equipment must fulfill and to whom additional features are tolerable provided they don't negatively impinge on the required features.

 

The second group must have a fully featured piece of equipment which offers them as much versatility as possible and which must fulfill all there expectations.

 

I am of course generalising but such is my experience. The first group tend to be uses who just use the gear and work with it and not complain, the second are sometimes seeking some form of perfection which doesn't exist and can complain about relatively minor problems and details, sometimes prior to buying the equipment (after which some will not buy but will look elsewhere at other equipment instead).

 

Consequently I tend to read reviews with the knowledge that they are rarely written by the first group......

[stuny]

John -

 

I must disagree based on many product releases of all types discussed on this forum. For example, just think back to when Apple released the first iPad. Many Forum members damned it even a month before it appeared in their markets, stating why the product is poor, bad or worthless. Some dismissed it for no other reason than they didn't like the name.

 

When I read user comments/reviews I'd really prefer to read only comments and reviews from people who actually used the product.

[bill]

In the case of the X Vario, there were some recurring hypothesis put forth as potential cons:

1. The lens is too slow, therefore cannot possibly take good photos (esp in low light)

2. The lens is slow AND big compared to the competition

3. The whole thing is too slow, big AND costs a lot more than the competition

 

I recognise all of the above. Some are subjective, some objective. Your rebuttals are selective. Your point, for example, about "the competition" rules out that to most people "the competition" is not just APS-C fixed-lens cameras. The maximum aperture of the lens is not just about available light shooting it is also about DoF. Costing more than the competition is simply a fact - see "competition" above.

 

The one you have missed out - which is also a fact and not even the most ardent fan can dispute - is that the camera lacks a built-in viewfinder of any sort. This is simply not acceptable in this day and age, at this level, at this price-point.

 

As I have said before, I don't need to step in dogshit to know what it is.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[bill]

I think you are missing the point of the article.

No one is expecting someone looking for a boat to buy a plane.

 

....but in the real world, people do. That's the whole point of discretionary - and indeed, displaced - spend. Read "The Wind in the Willows". Read how Mr. Toad was pant-wettingly excited about his new horse drawn caravan - until he saw a car.

 

The XV is a neither fish nor fowl, described on the menu as fillet steak and served up as hamburger. I have yet to see a review that changes that opinion.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[250swb]

 

When I read user comments/reviews I'd really prefer to read only comments and reviews from people who actually used the product.

 

So as with a case recently mentioned, when will somebody write a review of the 'Mini M'? It's a rhetorical question of course, because nobody will. But they can do the next best thing, comment on the thing masquerading as a 'Mini M' for which purchase should not be expected just to discover the lens won't come off. You can't expect people to keep quiet and maintain the charade while innocents might buy it following the hype surrounding its launch. How many pre-orders did dealers take based on the 'Mini M' hype? Do you really need to use one to comment on the subterfuge?

 

Leica started out with positivity in its hands, they got people excited, an 'M' of any type could only mean one thing, and then they turned it around into negativity.

 

Steve

[colonel]

...

 

The XV is a neither fish nor fowl, described on the menu as fillet steak and served up as hamburger. I have yet to see a review that changes that opinion.

 

Bill

 

Camera products, like anything else, do not have to fit in pre-made categories to be meaningful.

 

Perhaps its a Halloumi salad, marvelous to some, not interesting to others ?

[colonel]

when will somebody write a review of the 'Mini M'? It's a rhetorical question of course, because nobody will. But they can do the next best thing, comment on the thing masquerading as a 'Mini M'

Steve

 

Well Leica's marketing fell short, forgive me if I don't fall off my chair.

Note that it also described the X2 as a Micro-M, which should have made people put 2+2.

 

In any event, we have to judge the product as is, and not what is was, or was not, called before launch, and on that basis Leica seems to have many satisfied customers as well as, admittedly, many people disappointed inter-alia it is not an interchangeable lens camera.

[bill]

Camera products, like anything else, do not have to fit in pre-made categories to be meaningful.

 

Quite.

 

The best break the mould, not disappear within it.

 

Now, a little quiz for those who can be bothered. What's the difference betweeen a marvellous halloumi salad and an XV?

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[colonel]

Quite.

 

The best break the mould, not disappear within it.

 

Now, a little quiz for those who can be bothered. What's the difference betweeen a marvellous halloumi salad and an XV?

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

any while you are at it, I am very interested, fit the following into the category fish or fowl:

1. M6TTL

2, M7

3. MP

4. M8.2

5. M9

6. M240

 

?????

[bill]

From your answer I am clearly wasting my time - again. Do you not understand the phrase?

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[stunsworth]

What's the difference betweeen a marvellous halloumi salad and an XV

 

One's Greek and the other's Roman?

[pgk]

The current 'Mini' (Car) has nothing to do with the original apart from some vague degree of styling, but that doesn't stop people buying it. I've never driven one so I can't review it and my experience of it is limited to knowing its name and having an appreciation of its 'bloated' size (I've seen them up close) in comparison to the original........

 

If I moaned on and on about its characteristics I would rightly be accused of not knowing what I was on about.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[colonel]

From your answer I am clearly wasting my time - again. Do you not understand the phrase?

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

ok

I see I have to make this clearer to help understanding

 

First you say "neither fish nor fowl", i.e. doesn't fit into a category you are comfortable with.

You then go on to say "doesn't break the mold", which implies the opposite.

 

When people attack something from contradictory directions it indicates an irrational dislike.

 

BTW the x-vario is the only zoom fixed lens APS-C sensor camera, and its the only one with direct drive feel for MF. Maybe not for long, maybe not enough for you, but still an innovation in the current market. Although no doubt some folk will rubbish these features as its not important for them!