Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The whole Puts/Leica conflict of interest has been hashed to death around here so my only comment is to say I disagree. John Collier On Dec 20, 2003, at 12:01 AM, eric@jphotog.com wrote: >> "Conflict of interest" >> I think this is one of those things that is way over used and cared > > Being a journalist, I am automatically suspiscious of people who hide > their affiliation with anorganization. > > As for Erwin, I think he has established a reputation for his testing > methodology. The manknows lens performance. And I have no idea what is > official relationship > is with Leica. If hegets equipment free to test, that's one thing. If > they pay a substantial > part of his yearlyincome, that's another. I'm not aware of any > financial relatinship they > may have. But thatwould call into quesiton his credibility if I didn't > already know him to > be honest to a fault inhis reviews. (In the sense that he truly > believes what his tests tell him. > There is no deceptiongoing on). > > I do know that he gets information ahead of the rest of us. Which only > makes senseconsidering what he does for Leica in terms of benefitting > them with test > results that usuallymake them look good. That's becuase their lenses > are good. Not becuase > Erwin isobsequious. He is not. > > But anyone who doesn't see conflict of interest as a problem in the > context of any reportageis naive. - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html