Heard about the upcoming article here on BF. Mag arrived in the mail today. Got excited, couldn't wait to see the tester's opinions.
The article is by the (never seen a bad bin) Porters. Need I say more? No, but I can't help myself. How about:
dreck
drivel
sterile
politically correct
vacuous
wimpy
wussified
Basically its a puff piece for all of their advertisers. I could go on, but you get the idea. There's very little of this candy-coated BS at BF. Guess that's why I spend too much time here.
I've been looking to scale back on my mags, this may be the tipping point on BWD. Maybe I'll look at Alula or one of the UK mags.
Well, tell me, Bill -- are any of the bins they reviewed "bad"? If so, which ones? If none, then what are the Porters to say? I haven't see the article myself, but I will as soon as I can get a copy.
62 bins supposedly reviewed, tell me Curtis, do you really think they can ALL be good? Well I suppose if someone doesn't give a damn about FOV, CA, resolution, contrast, ER, brightness, edge resolution, handling, build quality, etc then they ARE all good. However, in my not in any way humble opinion, if their threshold for "good" is that low they aren't in any way qualified to be a reviewer. Its a 14 page puff piece with 2 comments that "may" be construed as being negative.
Here on BF you can find people trashing Leica, Swaro, Zeiss and Nikon. In BWD there's nary a negative for those, or the ultimate in quality Alpen, Zhumell, Carson, Simmons or Weaver bins. They do have a short list of "Bins of Note", but they don't really indicate why they are. You are wasting your money if you are looking to buy a copy for this article alone. You can get vastly more and better info here on BF in just a few minutes.