[Giklab]

I think the 'Reviews' section should get a 'Not Helpful' option for the user reviews. Check the DA* 60-250 section to see why I posted this thread.

I wanted to put a somewhat stronger adjective in the title, but then thought of 'pointless'. Pretty fitting, eh?

---

Last edited by Giklab; 09-05-2013 at 01:10 PM.

[TenZ.NL]

Well, not entirely piontless, at least 1 user found the review helpfull

[panoguy]

Well, not entirely piontless, at least 1 user found the review helpfull

For expanding their "ignore" list?

But seriously, I saw this too, and then took a look at that "reviewer's" history of reviews... almost all 10s, even for stuff they don't own! Maybe there should be a Captcha-type question before your review is posted, consisting of a grade-school-level math problem?

[Giklab]

There's an ignore list??!! Gimme gimme gimme!

But, seriously, there should be some kind of "review review" system, with upvotes and downvotes. But then how to stop people blasting anyone who gives a slightly lower rating... Could we rely on people being mature and reasonable...?

[scratchpaddy]

But then how to stop people blasting anyone who gives a slightly lower rating... Could we rely on people being mature and reasonable...?

Meta-likes? "Was the user that found this review unhelpful helpful?" Oh god, headache...

[Adam]

Everyone is free to express their opinion in the lens review section. We're not going to be censoring or editing reviews, etc.

However, if you spot a review from someone that doesn't actually own the lens, or if you see spam, then please report it using the reporting tool in the lens DB.

[manntax]

What about an idea of requiring a serial number when a review is being uploaded - or an image of a lens being reviewed ? This way we would know for sure that the person writing does that from a real experience.

[rbefly]

How about asking (requiring?) that the lens first be posted in the lens database with serial # before posting a lens review?
I also like the idea brought up on another thread, of throwing out the highest and lowest score (not the complete review, just one top score and one low score from the total) to minimize the effect of one bad lens (or grumpy user) from posting a '2' on a lens that otherwise rates a 9. It happens!
Ron

[steve1307]

Everyone is free to express their opinion in the lens review section. We're not going to be censoring or editing reviews, etc.

However, if you spot a review from someone that doesn't actually own the lens, or if you see spam, then please report it using the reporting tool in the lens DB.

I have a built in SPAM filter in my head, mainly exercised when reading NEWS websites.

Spam or not, if anyone "near where I live" can get a DA*60-250 for $550 then damn, I want to know about it!! That's a bargain no matter how heavy it is, I'll go to the gym more often.

[pinholecam]

One easy way is that at least one sample photo is to be uploaded.
This will make it easier for the mods to investigate if the poster is 'making things up'

[Rupert]

How is it possible to review a lens you don't own or haven't used extensively? Photos should definitely be a part of a review, along with the amount of experience with the lens and your general level of experience with the camera used, or with shooting in general.
It's OK with me if a person posting is not a Pro...but has good things to write, it means I might do good with the lens too!

Regards!

[Giklab]

However, if you spot a review from someone that doesn't actually own the lens, or if you see spam, then please report it using the reporting tool in the lens DB.

Adam, could you please explain how the Reporting tool works? I don't see an option to flag a particular review.

[Adam]

Adam, could you please explain how the Reporting tool works? I don't see an option to flag a particular review.

The reporting is done on a per-lens/item basis, so you would need to indicate in the report which review you'd like the moderators to look at .

And again, please note that we only remove reviews if they are fake or spam.

[Giklab]

The reporting is done on a per-lens/item basis, so you would need to indicate in the report which review you'd like the moderators to look at .

And again, please note that we only remove reviews if they are fake or spam.

Thank you for the explanation. On re-reading, it would seem that the review in question doesn't fall into these categories.

[kcmadr]

Sharpness: 9 Aberrations: 7 Bokeh: 6 Autofocus: 3 Handling: 10 Value: 1

It strikes me as odd that 9/10, 7/10, 6/10, 3/10, 10/10, and 1/10 at a price less than half of retail winds up being a value of 1. This needs tweaking for sure.

"It's not long enough for proper telephoto work" ... well, it wasn't designed as a long tele lens.

"It's too big and slow for portraits..." ... most people know that it's not a portrait lens, but can be used as one in the right hands.

"...200-400 f4... Sure it'd be a bit more expensive (but I'm sure they could do it for $2000 or so..." ... this is a 60-250mm f4 lens for around $1,300. That was the design intent. Sure it's disappointing their design intent didn't match yours, but that's no reason to spaz.

"... but it'd be heaps more useful, and not stuck in the middle of the road range." ... it might be "heaps more useful" to you, but then less useful to others. If you'd like a 200-400mm, then go buy one. But regrettably it won't be a Pentax lens. A lot of folks are looking for middle road coverage. Seemingly more than folks looking for longer lengths.

"If you want something you can actually use... 50-135, or 300 prime." ... I wanted something I can "actually use" so I went out and bought ... a Pentax DA☆ 60-250mm f4 lens, and by Jove I can "actually use" this lens and it gives me great results.

If this review had mass, it'd be holding down my papers.