Comments on: What To Do With All That New Christmas Money: Pop Photo’s Best Gear of 2012

By: Michael Leonard

Michael Leonard — Tue, 08 Jan 2013 20:03:00 +0000

Articles likes this help drive traffic to Pop Photo for those who may not know or think about it on a daily basis. I think it is a way that the various photo review/information sites can work with each other instead of compete with each other. It’s no different than sharing a link on Facebook and saying “Here’s a cool site!”. This is real petty complaining and I’m sure Pop Photo editors don’t mind traffic being driven to their site.

By: Andrew Berry

Andrew Berry — Tue, 01 Jan 2013 12:58:00 +0000

Re-badging news stories is an indication that we should all read Pop Photo instead of reading it a week later here, that if you find their two sentences of information hidden by 13 ads

By: Anders Petersen

Anders Petersen — Mon, 31 Dec 2012 00:09:00 +0000

Well that was interesting. Most of the stuff I either have no experience with or I’ve never even heard of before, which is great. But the stuff I actually know something about… Let’s just say there are “a few” factual errors…

The 40mm pancake does not offer “truly silent autofocus during video”. Any USM lens is quieter.
The lensbaby tilt lens doesn’t “increase or decrease apparent depth of field”. It MUST do both. A direct consequence of the Scheimpflug principle.
Rebel T4i does not have “noise kept to acceptable levels through ISO 12,800″. The noise performance is similar to that of the 500D. Which means it does not give you “virtually the same video capabilities as Canon’s EOS 5D Mark III”. Noise performance.
Lightroom 4 does not “recover more shadow and highlight detail than ever before”. Unless it was unable to read the RAW files properly in LR3… You can’t “recover” something that doesn’t exist.
All the functions for DxO viewpoint are either default or free plugins for Corel AfterShot Pro. Not wrong, it’s just that I can’t see how this is “best of the year”.

Though they didn’t have any glaring faults on the info of the 5d3 or D800. Which seems almost impressive at this point. Makes me wonder what else they’re overselling in their top 35…

By: Adam

Adam — Sun, 30 Dec 2012 04:11:00 +0000

I’m sorry you feel this way. However, Pop Photo doesn’t have any direct affiliate links themselves anyway. In addition, this post is just a way to raise awareness about their article. They’re a huge magazine and what they write is generally considered important. So why not help make our readers aware of that? Sure, we have a few affiliate links of our own, but we do have our own readers — many of which will be directed to the larger article on Pop Photo. I, myself, am very careful not to step on others’ toes, and I know no one is losing out because of this post. I hope you can appreciate the newsworthiness of Pop Photo’s article. Thanks.

Sincerely,
Adam

By: Jay Stebbins

Jay Stebbins — Sat, 29 Dec 2012 22:00:00 +0000

I have noticed this trend where FStoppers covers “another writer’s work” but replaces the outgoing links with your own affiliate links to the products mentioned. Pretty freaking cheesy!

If you had written the article from scratch, I would have been applauding you for your efforts instead of being disgusted for plagiarizing another authors efforts fro your own economic gain. Ads in the sidebar, I appreciate those when they are relevant. But this is no different then stealing another photographer’s image for your own gain.

Shame.

Jay Stebbins