22:36 "...because we kind of assume now that people know.....we try to disclose it" - like... no. You can't assume people know that Panasonic paid for your tickets, hotel stays, money and gave you the camera for free. The FTC has ruled on this and state that legally it's not common knowledge like what you're saying. You legally and ethically have to disclose these things. There's no disclosure in your S9 video or in the description! You even write in your Petapixel article, "This past month I found myself traveling to Japan to see the new Panasonic S9," - so did you and Jordan pay for your own travels to Japan and just so happen to pop into the Panasonic event because you were there? It's confusing. I find it bizarre you have this stance because I get individual KZfaqrs not disclosing because of ignorance, but you guys are part of a blog/company that's been around for over 10 years. Why isn't your company/you guys ethically and legally disclosing this information? From the FTC page "FTC's Endorsement Guides: What People Are Asking" "I’m a blogger and a company wants me to attend the launch of its new product. They will fly me to the launch and put me up in a hotel for a couple of nights. They aren’t paying me or giving me anything else. If I write a blog sharing my thoughts about the product, should I disclose anything? Yes. You should disclose that you received free travel and accommodations because it could affect how much weight your readers give to your thoughts about the product."
@MaximoJoshua2 ай бұрын
yeah, should always be disclosed.
@DanYosua2 ай бұрын
I would love to hear their response/thinking on the S9 video. For viewers who aren't savvy about any of this stuff, that one is especially insidious in terms of transparency. One, from the Japan aspect, but two and maybe more importantly, because of the (I assume sponsorship) Audiio sponsorship. They have the paid promotion tag, but they don't use the word sponsor in that first read, so potentially it's not? The point is that I have no idea about any of it, and to your point, that tag doesn't satisfy the FTC anyway. From an affiliate standpoint, I believe the FTC requires disclosure there too. It's possible they aren't Audiio affiliates (the URL has publisher and affiliate ids though) but that's not disclosed in the description either. Edit to add: there may be some US/CA distinction here from a technical legal requirement standpoint... regardless, it doesn't seem great to leave it as ambiguous as it is. Also, questions about that particular video aside, really appreciate the time spent talking about this. You guys have a big voice and it's a great time for everyone to look at their own processes and think about how we can all be more clear to shape the space.
@the_wiki94082 ай бұрын
Seriously though, who is out there thinking 50 youtubers each paid their own way to Japan to buy an S9 and give Panasonic free marketing? It would take a real naivety of how the world works. If Panasonic doesn't pay and provide cameras, almost nobody reviews the camera.
@MyLifeFrAiurGaming2 ай бұрын
Shut up
@niccollsvideo2 ай бұрын
We should absolutely disclose what we are doing on these events more thoroughly. I will definitely do better in this regard. It’s an important thing to do and I have no conflicts stating it.
@yawningmarmot2 ай бұрын
I feel like creators should disclose that the companies finance these trips. It's more transparent, ethical and just honest.
@-grey2 ай бұрын
All of this is an ad intentional or otherwise. Between paid sponsorships and fanatical fanboyism everything has a bias. Operate accordingly.
@Borodin4102 ай бұрын
They should just refuse the trips. You don't need to go on vacation to review a camera.
@VoltLover002 ай бұрын
Chris thinking people assume it is wrong
@taylor10382 ай бұрын
@@Borodin410 But then they don't get the early access to the camera, which does matter in this competitive KZfaq game.
@BlendyStick2 ай бұрын
@@taylor1038 Yup, the ever increasing speed of the internet media cycle pretty much forces you to play the game or be left behind.
@testcams2 ай бұрын
I watched 13 KZfaq videos by influencers/reviewers who went to the S9 press event and only two of them disclosed their trip to Japan was paid for by Panasonic. This is a clear violation of the FTC's disclosure rules, which state: "Disclose when you have any financial, employment, personal, or family relationship with a brand. Financial relationships aren’t limited to money. Disclose the relationship if you got anything of value to mention a product. If a brand gives you free or discounted products or other perks and then you mention one of its products, make a disclosure even if you weren’t asked to mention that product."
@logtothebase22 ай бұрын
yes but no one is going out there on there own expense, or should they. Its reasonable that the launch budget would pay expenses of Journo's they want to attend and make it a decent experience. We all. know that right?, we do, we know that.
@testcams2 ай бұрын
@@logtothebase2 The "it should have been obvious" argument doesn't hold water. First, in all other areas of journalism the media organization does pay their own way. Second, many viewers targeted by these products are younger and do not have the life experience to know these trip arrangements are paid for by the brand being covered. This is precisely why the FTC has its disclosure rules - to protect all consumers, including the less experienced, from influencers presenting information as testimonials for products they have a financial incentive to cover.
@logtothebase22 ай бұрын
@@testcams You could say that and I expected someone would.
@BootStrapTurnerVideography2 ай бұрын
~19 of the 100 invites were from the US. The FTC doesn't apply to over 89 of them. I am also frustrated with non-disclosure, but it's not a legal requirement everywhere in the KZfaq or other social media environments.
@POVwithRC2 ай бұрын
Well, call the FTC and start the process, big guy. The number is on the website. I'll wait here to see if your interpretation is their interpretation. (I know what they'll say, and if you are appealing to them before asking, you'll have to be morally consistent and accept their ruling when they tell you what's up on the phone)
@evanthecameraman2 ай бұрын
"KZfaqrs" are missing the point. The trip wasn't the problem. Panasonic wasn't the problem. The viewers feel they are being sold to in an non authentic way and when they gave that criticism it was ill received. You had those same KZfaqrs responding with insults, going live and getting hyper defensive amongst other things which took things from bad to worse. Their terrible personalities really were highlighted with the way some chose to respond.
@MaximoJoshua2 ай бұрын
great point. The audience questioned whether the reviews were honest, and instead of assuaging those concerns, they doubled down, and attacked the audience. You need credibility, and that wasn't the way to get it. I think it was a subtle feeling of "really?", which could have been handled better. I think PP handled it really well, and I appreciated Jordan saying they are going to be more consistent.
@hanumanguy2 ай бұрын
Well said.
@janwedek2 ай бұрын
Who?
@EH-pm1ke2 ай бұрын
Which youtubers responded with insults? I haven’t seen the drama yet
@hanumanguy2 ай бұрын
@@EH-pm1ke Here's a few that gave push back Kofi Yeboah, Cammacay, Dustin Armstrong
@johnbunani13412 ай бұрын
28:03 “We call these impressions, we don’t call them reviews-absolutely not.” You literally called the S9 article that YOU wrote an “Initial REVIEW”…
@MaximoJoshua2 ай бұрын
it is in the review section of the website...should be a bit clearer, i prefer the term product showcase (although initial impressions is good too). I think PP in general does a really good job in being objective.
@jonathand8272 ай бұрын
It’s on purpose that’s why, they wont 100% commit because then they would have to disclose KZfaqrs like this one, finding loopholes around things which tells you there’s dishonesty going around, This is what happens when you have a KZfaq channel that you’re trying to pay your rent with your channel.
@niccollsvideo2 ай бұрын
The wording is something we can look at changing. We have discussed these things as a team and made decisions on what we will call early reviews and full reviews at a later date. This is why these conversations are important to have. I can promise you we will talk about it again as a team.
@jonathand8272 ай бұрын
@@niccollsvideo do what is right and everything will fall into place then you don’t have to damage control later.
@shammyh2 ай бұрын
@@niccollsvideo"early review" implies that the differentiating factor is temporal. Eg. "earlier than a later review". Showcase, or preview, or whatever other language implies the actual content quality/purpose/intent is different, which it very much is. Hence, I think "early review" is a bit dishonest. It's really a time-pressured review of an incomplete product. That's not early, it's incomplete.
@griegomas2 ай бұрын
I am a little perplexed by the debate here - these trips are a form of sponsorship, and that should be disclosed in the associated video.
@USGrant21st2 ай бұрын
Every video should start with a clear and conspicuous disclosure stating the conflict of interest and warning to the viewer.
@thomasa.2432 ай бұрын
You are always biased by the events. Everyone is, it is human. This is why it is important to disclose it, always. I do not work in a position that allows me to make decisions that are making significant impact to other people but even I have to disclose every coffee I get (actually, we should decline that but everyone understands that this is not always possible in normal human interaction) because it may impact my decision implicitly. What is interesting is that it now gets pushed with the S9 launch even though this is happening since forever…
@Adventurist2 ай бұрын
100% of this could be translated over to the motorcycle industry. Fortnine did a great video about this a while ago. How can you be objective when you get flown out to a 5 star hotel in Spain, handed a press kit, a nice motorcycle and follow a guide who knows the best roads in the area. But at the same time you have to trust the journalist that he / she is able to separate the "bribery" from the facts.
@andreatilli62272 ай бұрын
Love Fortnine. Mind sharing title of video?
@Adventurist2 ай бұрын
@@andreatilli6227 I believe it was something along the lines of "how motorcycle brands buy positive reviews". It was a very old video of Ryan ripping around the canadian woods while motovlogging.
@MaximoJoshua2 ай бұрын
Great video, 6 years ago, and still relevant today...
@petercofrancesco98122 ай бұрын
I didn't see what you're talking about but you summed it up nicely. This phenomenon extends further to all KZfaq gear videos even ones outside of product release trips whether the pressure is implied or direct from the manufacture or an internal fear of the creator. If you offend a manufacture, you could be ghosted. Beyond that most people who want to watch gear review videos tend to want to believe that it will be a game changer. So outside of the manufacture motives, there's an incentive delivering hype instead of bad news for views and likes. There's a lot of brand loyalty from viewers who don't like you criticizing "their" brand.
@bladerealm1242 ай бұрын
I thought it was silly that they brought up "other industries have done this for decades!" as if that makes it okay or ethical. I get that they were just trying to let people know it's "normal" but schmoozing reviewers makes for biased reviews in any industry.
@MegaNardman2 ай бұрын
First, I want to say that I love Chris, Jordan, and Jaron. I believe that they believe that they approach these trips in an unbiased manner, and the benefits of access don't alter their initial reviews (their title). All that said, the fact that Chris and Jordan openly refer to previously being in "camera jail" with manufacturers speaks volumes to the inherent presssure to not offend the manufacturer, and, IMO, proves Gerald's point. I get that companies have the right to choose who to work with and bring along to these events; they all have marketing goals to show their equipment in the best light to the widest audience. Where this crosses the line for me is when the company stops working with a reviewer, based on their prior reviews (NOT previews, or whatever clear distinction we want to call these glorified marketing events) of their product. I don't believe anyone on PP touched on Gerald Undone's allegation of Lumix's offer to try to get him access if they could screen his review title; shouldn't there be outrage, or at least concern about this? Or was this such standard affair for everyone that it didn't register as deeply unethical?
@niccollsvideo2 ай бұрын
I appreciate what you’re saying. The point I wanted to make on the pod is that there are many reasons to have disagreements with manufacturers. It’s almost never from being honest about a product in our experience. It’s usually more to do with making a joke that they didn’t appreciate or having a sense of humour that they don’t agree with. Our best and worst of episodes for example can rub people the wrong way. We still do our thing of course. Sometimes there are simple misunderstandings or miscommunications too and ultimately it is up to the manufacturers where they think their best interests lie in terms of how they market their products. I felt a disconnect with what Gerald was against though in regards to manufacturers because I haven’t seen that kind of behavior from them myself. It for being honest about a product.
@MegaNardman2 ай бұрын
@@niccollsvideo Thank you for the reply, Chris. I'm not reaching for my pitchfork here, and I certainly won't fault you for disagreeing based on your own firsthand experiences with the manufacturers. What I'd ask is do you believe the manufacturer rules of engagement are the same for a long-established reviewer such as yourself as they would be for a smaller and/or more niche reviewer? As a know-nothing outsider to this whole affair (who watches both you and GU, and trusts both of your opinions, btw), it appears entirely plausible that there could exist different manufacturer rules for different reviewers.
@niccollsvideo2 ай бұрын
@@MegaNardman Certainly a good point to consider. I can only say that from my experience when we were that small channel just trying to get going we tried to be as unbiased as possible right from the start and despite that we were soon invited to some of these trips. From the very start all the manufacturers would state to us that they wanted us to be fair and honest about their products and that is still the way it is for us today. If anything I think any new creators should endeavour to stick to being as honest as possible about the products making sure that they are as informed as possible about what and why they are making opinions about it. If it’s interesting and informative content , I think the manufacturers would respond to it. I absolutely do think that creators can end up having different relationships with a manufacturer and be looked at in more or less favourable light but I suspect it comes more from relatability, personal reasons, or methods of communication than it does from authenticity of reviews.
@MegaNardman2 ай бұрын
@@niccollsvideo Thank you again for the insight (and for PP even broaching the subject). I don't believe this type of concern is specific to cameras; it's really an age-old concern of access for journalists. I don't love these preview events, personally, but I understand why they exist. Lastly, I just want to call out that you and Jordan have been particularly successful at building a body of work that generates a huge benefit of doubt whenever these types of things arise. Every reviewer lives and dies by the perception of their trustworthiness, and you two have never given me cause to question yours...especially when it comes to 35mm primes :)
@USGrant21st2 ай бұрын
Let's just make it clear, manufacturers are there to sell their products, they incur marketing expenses supporting the reviewers in order to make more money through sales, brand recognition, etc. To whatever degree the reviewers are honest in their presentation doesn't change the essence -- it's a paid promotion and the viewers must be warned.
@SrCarpi2 ай бұрын
"We *try* to disclose it." What does that mean exactly? Are you trying to imply that sometimes you *try* to disclose, but can't manage to do it? As a certain Jedi master said, "Do . . . or do not. There is no try."
@SlotCarNewsOfficial2 ай бұрын
Exactly, do not try, do.
@PippetWhippet2 ай бұрын
You should probably stop taking life advice from sayings, particularly ones said by fictional characters in a fantasy world. If you do something, by definition you tried to do something. No matter what George Lucas thought sounded cool.
@MarkRowsey2 ай бұрын
A press trip (as the title of this podcast suggests) or a press conference/announcement is when a company gathers members of news organizations to communicate their message to the public in hopes that the press, in turn, will help distribute that message for free. When a company flies someone out, and then puts them under a NDA, they are no longer acting as press, they are literally spokesman for that company. If however, everyone learns about the announcement when the company actually announces it, think Apple announcements, then it's a press conference/trip, or whatever. Gerald Undone was spot on with his analysis. I think y'all shouldn't go to announcements/events either unless you're allowed to "report" on it the moment you hear about it. If not, you're basically working for the camera company.
@hanumanguy2 ай бұрын
You raise a very good point here. These are not press trips. I don't think an accredited news organization would allow expenses to be paid for a journalist to be paid by the company that they are covering. They are projecting that they are like journalists but participating in the influence game.
@NotAnotherChannel_Channel2 ай бұрын
Long story short, if you are reviewing a product you were compensated for in any way, you need to say that up front. You guys do a good job of that. Many do not.
@e-hfilms2 ай бұрын
Ethically, just because money doesn't exchange hands doesn't wash away the exchange of power. If you get access to something before someone else does, thats a power imbalance and you are no longer reviewing anything: You are marketing it. Which is why the FTC has disclosure rules about this stuff. As a cinematographer that does reviews on the side and pays for every equipment rental, every short film, every photoshoot, to actually use the equipment, I have never understood how half of these creators can even say that they reviewed a piece of equipment when all they do is sit behind a desk, or pop out to their backyard or favorite drainage ditch. Creators need to put their money where their mouth is and start making reviews or projects that actually use the equipment, and start paying their own way instead of letting access from multi-billion dollar companies go to their heads.
@ItsWillLee2 ай бұрын
100%
@natureredux19572 ай бұрын
You 100% nailed it.
@robert_may2 ай бұрын
In general I agree 👍 Most of my reviews are of things I've owned for 6 months or more. Even as I'm starting to get a few review copies of gear, I'm trying to ensure I have it for at least a few weeks in order to actually use it, and so far I've not had to come up with a video on something within a day (thankfully). I am somewhat lucky there though, in that I am cursed when it comes to tech and I inevitably find a terrible flaw in it within the first day, so maybe it won't be too bad when it happens 😅 But for anything that I don't have a prolonged period of time with; yes, I wouldn't call it a review either. Mine are usually titled quite literally, like "Two weeks with..." etc, even though that doesn't do me many favours with the KZfaq algorithm.
@fred48592 ай бұрын
Thank you. I pointed this out to a content producer . Don’t fall for it , it’s semantics.
@pedrocorreia23062 ай бұрын
After spending 6 hours editing pictures from a photoshoot i did at a private jet convention show in Geneva, this podcast helps me come back to real life... Thanks guys!
@Jay-sr8ge2 ай бұрын
I work in engineering and we're not even allowed to accepts gifts worth over $100 from a client without raising ethical concerns. These mfs getting flown out to fancy hotels etc and expect us not to acknowledge the ethical concerns.
@ashliehiggins2 ай бұрын
Same I've had 25euro limits and can't even offer to buy food for a person without several managers signing off.
@TrekCZ2 ай бұрын
There are many important details, e.g. value of trips (trip to Japan is from my pov too expensive), type of creator - how big is the KZfaqr, do they have journalistic license? It looks like that majority of creators know nothing about ethics, bribery, etc. as they never experienced consequences, never had training related to issue perhaps, etc.
@Jay-sr8ge2 ай бұрын
@@TrekCZ personally I don't think a company's marketing budget should be spent on the same journalists expected to give honest opinions on the product. It's a huge conflict of interest. Even if they try not to be biased, they will try not to come off as "rude" because these are their friends... Like what??
@angeloplayforone2 ай бұрын
This happened also to medical doctors being invited by pharmaceutical companies, but the only subject covered are how to golf. This has been made illegal in my country.
@MichaelDBeltran2 ай бұрын
The difference between marketing and engineering
@o.n.e.wayhunting2 ай бұрын
Gerald isn't rude. He is honest, thorough, and detailed. Those cornerstones are more valuable and useful than hype opinions and playing politics with a company. If they can't take honesty about their product, then perhaps there is a good chance they are dishonest and hiding something, and hand picking those who they feel they can manipulate into a more positive video, whether they can or not. I think that is the true take from Gerald. His video was needed and spot on.
@kirkpine83422 ай бұрын
Reguardless if you agree with what Gerald said or not it's a great place for discussion. I think there is a lot of value in what he is stating. Hopefully the discussion leads to a more productive environment for both manufacturers and creators.
@akhyarrayhka40482 ай бұрын
pre production camera should never be called review
@PetaPixel2 ай бұрын
We agree. Which is why we never do. -Jaron
@YaYousef52 ай бұрын
@PetaPixel The article on Petapixel for the S9 is titled, "Panasonic Lumix S9 Initial Review: Small, Pretty, and Confusing". In the article, Chris writes, "With a pre-production S9 in hand"
@MaximoJoshua2 ай бұрын
@@YaYousef5 and you access the article by going to the "reviews" section of the site...
@NotAnotherChannel_Channel2 ай бұрын
You honestly don’t see value in reviewing pre-production gear? With the S9 alone, it would be difficult to argue that there is not great value for consumers in getting a first-look at a new camera.
@hyonkwon93222 ай бұрын
This must hurt since a lot of KZfaqrs are talking about this…
@jonathand8272 ай бұрын
Guilty conscience that’s why.
@niccollsvideo2 ай бұрын
Gahd, it’s not a guilty conscience. It’s because it’s an important conversation to have and it’s clearly contentious. We simply want to be a part of the conversation when the alternative is to sit and say nothing.
@hyonkwon93222 ай бұрын
@@niccollsvideo I am a long time follower from the early days of the Camera Store. I value your insights. As you see in my original comment, I was talking about other KZfaqrs. A lot of them are talking about this issue. Review these days are a part of marketing, and of course KZfaqrs are going to find the delicate balance to satisfy both companies and viewers. Sponsored reviews are nothing more than sponsor reviews. There is nothing to be ashamed about making sponsored reviews! The problem comes when KZfaqrs are trying to position themselves as a neutral reviewer when it’s sponsored (paid or any other way). A sponsor review is just a sponsored review. Sponsored review is not a neutral review because the only way to be invited to places or events are to not cross over the bad side of the manufacturers. Sponsored reviews are not bad or evil. I know you guys are doing everything in your power to make great videos and you guys are definitely doing a great job. We need sponsored reviews so we can get info asap! You guys do your job and don’t worry about this, because this will be forgotten tomorrow.
@hanumanguy2 ай бұрын
Yeah because they see themselves as independent reviewers like journalists and want that respect and then get butt hurt when we find out they are mainlining free sushi and saki. They are influencers, their business is to influence their followers to buy shit from brands that are smoozing them. Nothing more.
@Roland3142 ай бұрын
@@niccollsvideo I really wish you guys would have had Gerald on for this conversation, especially as Jaron repeatedly talks about how many things can be solved just by talking.
@patrick80352 ай бұрын
I follow Chris and Jordan all the way back from Camera Store TV and I’ve never doubted their integrity. Not properly disclosing that the trip to the Panasonic event was a rare misstep, but it doesn’t tarnish all of the reputation they’ve built over the years. Being a journalist is about providing information, and part of that is building relationships with people that can give you access. That means you don’t be a dick to the people who give you access to demonstrate to people how impartial they are. It’s called diplomacy; remember the last time someone hung you out to dry and think of how helpful you wanted to them the next time they asked something from you.
@JohnDrummondPhoto2 ай бұрын
I just checked Google Maps. Bay Photo Lab is still located in Santa Cruz, catty-corners across the street from The Buttery. Get over there, guys!
@lionheart44242 ай бұрын
I think I am on Gerald's side here. You guys said that you had fun shooting with the camera and meeting new people, and I think that was Gerald's point. You already are established personalities in the camera world, and keep your honesty by calling things you might think are not great from the products. But what about the new people? They will have fun, and that translates to the initial reception of the product. How many times have you heard at the end of a camera review "despite its shortcomings, I had so much fun shooting with this camera!"? Based on what Gerald shared, seems to be exactly what Panasonic is aiming for by "soft-banning" creators who will not share the expected "vibes". By the time initial buyers realize that the camera is not for them, it's past late. I think this is also Fujifilm's tactic particularly with the X-T50, so much hype and "good vibes" from all these influencers, yet that camera is just some hundred dollars behind the superior X-T5. As others have said, you should not rely on assumptions from the viewers to say "ah yes, of course they would not pay to travel there for this camera".
@USGrant21st2 ай бұрын
The interesting thing is that "honesty" in the final analysis makes no difference. If the company likes your "honesty" (it makes them money) they will invite you, if your honesty doesn't make them money they don't invite you. What you see and hear is done in company's interest. not necessary in consumers' interest. So "honesty" makes no difference, the marketing departments are not composed of incompetent people who spend their budgets on something that wouldn't benefit the company.
@CLIFFLIX2 ай бұрын
It's funny...PetaPixel mentioned about "rudeness" and companies not wanting to deal with that. After years of talking to MANY people at NAB, I can say that one of the big KZfaqrs in question seems to have a bad reputation of being VERY rude and arrogant. Dozens of different well-known sources over the years seem to confirm this....
@bladerealm1242 ай бұрын
Who?
@hanumanguy2 ай бұрын
Disclosure. You guys didn't make any disclosure on your S9 video. "Try to" "Assume everyone knows" is not good enough. I watched quite a few videos and many KZfaqrs didn't make a disclosure. I can tell you immediate my trust and empathy towards a KZfaqr that disclosed his brand relationship was way higher. Shout out to Hugh Brownstone and Geeky Nerdy Tech (he even marked his content sponsored) and Julia Trotti. You guys are way experienced and should know better. KZfaqrs can't have it both ways i.e. expect to be treated like they are providing completely independent editorial and act like influencers accepting brand deals. This is about trust and authenticity. If you are accepting brand deals, be open and honest about it. There is place for it just as there is place for KZfaqrs that don't do brand deals and do reviews. I was only a little annoyed by the S9 launch but when the KZfaqrs started gaslighting their viewers it set me off!
@bladerealm1242 ай бұрын
These are my thoughts as a long-time huge fan of Chris and Jordan, you guys are still my favorite youtubers for camera gear. It's difficult for me to even criticize this whole thing because I'm biased in that I want you to continue doing what you do and how you do it. I think you guys do a pretty great job making balanced and fair reviews compared to many others. This recent criticism of creators probably doesn't apply to you quite as much as some others, like ones who don't disclose that their trip was paid for, clearly understate the flaws of a camera, etc. However, in watching this podcast I felt like this was the first time I've ever seen Chris and Jordan uncomfortable discussing a topic, especially the first few minutes. I guess it's just the nature of the situation but it felt like you guys were on the defense, downplaying most of the benefits of early access to gear, paid trips, things that would absolutely influence any person's opinion on gear regardless of how much you try to disconnect those feelings and stay unbiased. I'm sure you guys are experienced enough to stay less biased than most, but I can't say the same for many others. I say all of this with all due respect as you guys are my favorite youtubers but the responses felt a bit out of touch and "missing the point". And I'm conflicted on this because I want you to continue making these on-location videos, first looks, etc. but I think this discussion is needed for the industry and Camera KZfaq as a whole. Chris's first "argument" was about how Panasonic still invited them even though they said it's not the camera for you guys. I'm glad Jaron quickly pointed out that that's the same reason others weren't invited to the event. So it does seem like Panasonic may choose creators who they think will sugarcoat or be less harsh on the camera, especially something like the S9 that I'm sure they know will be received poorly. IMO it's just a bad product. Overpriced and underwhelming. Another point made was that "other industries do this too" but that doesn't make it any more ethical or less misleading (in terms of camera "reviews"). I know you were just trying to say how "normal" it is but that doesn't make it any more ethical or less misleading (in terms of camera "reviews"). What I would love to have heard is more of a discussion on the industry as a whole, thoughts on what could be done differently by both creators and companies, etc. This podcast felt far too focused on just how you guys do things but I understand you wanted to "clear the air" and clarify those points. I don't think it's you guys or any one youtuber in particular that Gerald or commentors take issue with, but the facade of "unbiased reviews", free products, influencers downplaying or not fully disclosing details of their early access, paid trips, etc.
@Roland3142 ай бұрын
I agree with this 100%. I love these guys, but this was one of the few times I felt like they missed the mark.
@rupertkingsley2 ай бұрын
You guys dropped the ball on this. It didn’t come over well at all. “We don’t sleep, we get up early….” With free flights to a beautiful country, free accommodation, free meals. Oh the calamity!
@pdcorlis2 ай бұрын
These trips are taxable in the US too. I wonder how many of these influencers will declare the value of these trips on their taxes?
@jacobterrazas31472 ай бұрын
Sorry man but you're way off base on this, I go on work trips as a photographer and videographer a few times a year being sent out to "fun" places like Orlando, New Orleans, Las Vegas: but it doesn't matter where you're going cuz you're working the whole time. You don't get to go sit on a beach all day, you're there for a job and at the end of those trips I'm always completely exhausted.
@niccollsvideo2 ай бұрын
I disagree with you. These events are nice, absolutely, but we could choose to relax and drink all the drinks and visit with all our friends and treat it as a semi vacation but instead we choose to work as hard as we can so the viewers get content and we find as much out about the products as possible. Would you have preferred if we just sat on couches and hung out and partied the whole time?!
@RicanStudio2 ай бұрын
Why is everyone so defensive and negative?! I found the whole discussion about press trips very defensive and weird guys. I think things should be clearly disclosed, but at the same time I think the whole ecosystem of camera manufacturing and reviews is a symbiotic and largely healthy relationship. I love the tech, I like the reviewers, I want the companies to sell products and develop new ones. Why is everyone so defensive and negative?! That's my biggest complaint about this whole conversation... Let's look at the big picture. If the ecosystem wasn't healthy bad cameras could come out and sell a lot and no one would say anything. That's impossible! The youtube camera space has too much healthy competition and sharing of information. Compare this industry to almost any other.
@cornellouis2 ай бұрын
"This camera isn't for you." is just a spin on "You will point out the poor tradeoffs we have chosen in this camera." There is plenty of gear that people said nice things about that the people wouldn't use themselves. For example, the recent heavy-ass Sigma 14/15mm full frame lenses that would mostly appeal to astrophotographers. They were $$$ and would appeal to a niche audience, but they were still a product that *made sense* for that audience. The problem people have w/ the S9 is that it doesn't *make sense*. For what it was - a cut down S5ii - it needed a price cut, and it needed a bigger weight difference than 200g.
@MaximoJoshua2 ай бұрын
exactly this, I think if someone buys this as their first camera, they will be frustrated and confused. So I have no issue with the camera, I just wouldn't guide people to make it their choice for their only or first camera. This camera is stuck in a tiny area between "just keep using your iphone" and "spend a tiny bit more and get the S5II" I think that value prop, combined with them removing features from video and photo satisfying neither use cases, is why this camera makes so little sense.
@-grey2 ай бұрын
I don't want an EVF, I don't use the so it's dead bulk to me as someone who wants a small compact camera. It's smaller and cheaper than most of Fujifilm's line up right now, with better AF, better IBIS, a better custom jpeg system, and it's full frame. The reason I don't want an S5II is because I don't want to carry around an S5II. This way I get all the bits of the S5II I want without the extra bits I don't. It makes perfect sense to me. Way cheaper than the a7CII also. Although, I agree: not a beginner camera, more for people who know what they want and can live without. This goes for my Ricoh GRIII also. The S5II is way better on paper value, but would sit on my shelf at home. The S9 would go everywhere and I'd get shots I otherwise would have missed.
@MaximoJoshua2 ай бұрын
@@-grey yeah, I think you are a great demographic for a camera like this. It's kind of like you have to know what you want to know what you don't need. A person getting their first camera would probably be very frustrated with the recording turning off after 10-15 minutes, and would say something like "my iphone can record an hour"...at least I would, if i didn't do research in advance, and know the limitations. I am not sure I agree on S5II, its not that much bigger, maybe it makes a material difference, but if i want something pocketable, I am gonna use my iPhone...I see no reason to spend 1500 and get an f/8 lens in order to put another thing in my pocket. If they had nailed the launch lens with a minimum f/2.8 AF variable aperture pancake lens (doesn't Nikon have a f/1.2?), I could see this being an everyday carry type of camera (though I would still probably get frustrated very often).
@MaximoJoshua2 ай бұрын
to be clear, I think the camera is fine, and probably takes great videos and images, its just that cameras don't live in a vacuum, and there are a lot of other options around that price point that are pretty awesome. I mean, for some people, the BMCC 6k is just an amazing value for 75 dollars more. For others, the X100VI, I just wish this camera had a clearer identity. So its all subjective, I am sure almost everyone would say it is a joke at 3k, while i am sure almost everyone would say its a must have at 500. I think 1500 is a bit more than what i would get, value wise, but every person is different (I would prefer no record limit at 1200-1300) that would probably balance the scales for me.
@VoltLover002 ай бұрын
Its a piece of overpriced trash that simply doesn't need to exist
@markusworsdorfer44322 ай бұрын
I think Fujifilm has to be praised for bringing a medium format 500 F5.6 lens that isn't much bigger, heavier or even more expensive than Sigma's new 500 5.6. That in itself is incredible considering we always talk about medium format being to big, to heavy and to expensive.
@DanDuke-dg3nk2 ай бұрын
Five minutes in and already hyped for today's subject matter, makes the work day better to hear you guys talk and to learn more about the industry!
@fofopho2 ай бұрын
I think you guys misunderstood the spirit of Gerald‘s criticism. There’s no need for you to be defensive, we all know you do great work at these press trips and Gerald‘s point wasn’t D that it’s not any one person who is the problem, but it’s clear from this video that you guys don’t understand or can’t look at this from the viewpoint of the consumer who’s taking in these videos, and making purchasing decisions based on these videos. I can tell you for sure as a consumer there is definitely a fatigue with this process of 100 glowing videos coming out on embargo day, pre-orders happening, and then a new set of videos that have discovered a bunch of new problems or quirks or irregularities down the line. And while you guys may be able to remove yourself from the positive flux surrounding these press trips because you’ve been doing it so long… The majority of the videos coming out on embargo day are not doing that in a meaningful way.
@fofopho2 ай бұрын
I think one correction may be that you all likely understand and agree with a lot of what Gerald said, but the podcast was a bad format to address it. As it came off a bit defensive at times and like you didn’t understand the core of his critique because you can’t see it from the consumers perspective, but as someone who is a producer on multiple podcasts, I know it can be a difficult format to be concise and direct in addressing topics like this in a conversational setting.
@bladerealm1242 ай бұрын
Well said
@hanumanguy2 ай бұрын
@@fofopho I didn't think framing it as a "drama" was constructive and it sounds dismissive. Yes there is drama but there are real underlying issues that us consumers have around this. I applaud Chris going through the comments and making a serious attempt to listen to the feedback. KZfaqrs making videos bashing the audience is just digging a hole in my opinion.
@cornellouis2 ай бұрын
lol Comparing your free trip to another industry's free trip in order to downplay the exchange of value isn't a good look.
@bladerealm1242 ай бұрын
That was the weirdest "argument". I think they were just emphasizing that it's normal across other industries but that doesn't make it ethical.
@Jochadow2 ай бұрын
It’s ok to be biased… There’s nothing wrong with that and almost all of us are. But when I hear people saying “I’m not biased” I can smell something wrong here. You guys are used to the good life so much that you forget to mention legitimate things like my few thousand dollar trip was paid for.
@GerryNaughton2 ай бұрын
A slightly arrogant and patronising response to Gerald's video. I'm sure he has tried to speak to Lumix but probably can't be bothered now. These "first impressions " videos do look reviews. More transparency is necessary
@niccollsvideo2 ай бұрын
Well I hear you Gerry. We can do better but I will stand behind the hard work we do on these trips and that they have good value for the viewer. As for the relationship between Gerald and the manufacturers there are always two sides to every story.
@GerryNaughton2 ай бұрын
Perhaps @Panasoniclumixvideo should come out and explain what happened? Did they really want to control the title of one of his review videos?
@niccollsvideo2 ай бұрын
@@GerryNaughton I personally can’t see that. We have given their products worst camera of the year twice and called the S9 baffling in the title. On multiple occasions I’ve stated how unsexy I find their cameras to be. They’ve always been open to communication with us and respectful of our work.
@bladerealm1242 ай бұрын
Chris I think you guys may be missing the mark on what your viewers are saying and feeling. Nobody is saying you guys aren't working hard. We're all watching all the content you're creating and I think most of us longtime fans understand the effort that goes into making these videos (and keeping up with the podcast and all these comments!). But that's not what anyone is saying or focused on. Viewers are frustrated by the industry practices and how that influences the feedback on BAD products. Companies are trying to manipulate youtubers to create positive feedback even if it's subtle, a free trip, food, early access, etc. As Jaron has said this topic has been discussed in the past but not to this extent and not brought into light by a big time "insider" until now. Gerald went over the top (as he does with everything) in highlighting many of the issues with this whole practice of paid trips, free gear, etc. I urge you to continue to read through more of your fans comments on this episode, put yourself in our shoes, and really try to understand how we're feeling as viewers. And watch some of the other S9 videos from small to mid-size channels to get an idea of how this and other events are influencing creator's "unbiased opinions".
@GerryNaughton2 ай бұрын
Just found an old DP review video, titled " Panasonic Lumix S5 II Review(from Tokyo!)" How misleading is that? I'm sure you all worked very hard on it but you are hardly going to say anything bad about the camera after travelling to Japan at Panasonic's expense. Us viewers obviously need to be more savvie.
@UnconventionalReasoning2 ай бұрын
On the compressed RAW question, Chris: "As far as photo goes, lossless compressed is the way to go. You'll save a lot of space, the image quality loss is negligible." Slight correctly: The image quality loss is so negligible that it is exactly zero.
@EH-pm1ke2 ай бұрын
Whenever I see a new lens or body embargo drop with a ton of youtubers clearly at the same press event, I assign the credibility of everyone participating to zero. I know I’m not the only one.
@jeffriart2 ай бұрын
Yes, I would love to see the review of D-lux 8. I think the new interface is interesting, unlike the D-lux 7 that is basically a rebrand of LX100ii, it seems they went further to make it their own this time. Even if the sensor and most of the hardware remains the same, it would be cool to see if there's any improvement.
@bingbong48482 ай бұрын
I dare you guys to say that this episode is sponsored by Lumix 😂
@Giovanni-Giorgio2 ай бұрын
I was waiting for a Lumix S9 video ad in this episode 😏
@skepsys2 ай бұрын
but isnt that blue camera on Chris's desk an s9?
@hanumanguy2 ай бұрын
He sat the effing S9 in camera view all episode!!!!!
@bladerealm1242 ай бұрын
Every "review" made on or after a paid trip should state "this video is sponsored by 'insert company schmoozing us'".
@Carthodon2 ай бұрын
So on reviewing things, cameras or not, I think you have the wrong perspective here. That its normal for reviewers and journalists to be wined and dined does not make it ethical, and there are real consequences for journalism in general. It is perfectly normal for people who develop friendships with people in the industry to have a harder time of being critical, its why writers like George Orwell made it an explicit policy to not meet people they have to be critical of. That gratitude that Chris talks about, that's the reason to not accept any of it because it will make him feel bad to be harsh. These are companies and they are only paying because they think they will make money out of it, not to be nice, you don't owe any gratitude even though its normal. As a result of the wide range of things that can make it difficult for journalists to be critical, we now have a world where a lot of reviews are warped to such an extent that people just turn off. None of my friends value movie reviews that come out when the movie comes out because they are going to be generally inflated, its why its now normal for Rotten Tomatoes scores to fall by 20% over the course of months. I think what's going on here is an extension of the democratization of journalism. In the past when media publishing was very limited, like the NY Times or Consumer Reports, they were able to implement rules that commercial enterprises had to accept because there weren't many alternatives, like an outright ban of accepting perks if you intend to review something. Now, because there are so many media sources if one refuses to play ball with a commercial enterprise then the enterprise can just withdraw access and that will put any individual creator at a disadvantage, its why White House press aren't able to ask interesting questions. What's the solution I'm not sure but that there is a problem I think is apparent. P.S. It would also be nice if reviewers instead of giving a short disclaimer actually went through what it is like to be invited, what is paid for, what are the pressures, what's the vibe, because until Gerald Undone said anything I did not know that the companies covered not only travel and lodging but also food and recreational activities. The degree to which reviewers seem to avoid making a video on this I think is telling on whether there is something to be ashamed about here.
@Mamotreco2 ай бұрын
I have a completely different take on this. The fact that viewers are horrified or disgusted speaks to their abdication of responsibility to consume media with a critical eye. All the commenters on the Panasonic S9 videos calling the creators "shills" demonstrated a complete lack of media literacy and an extremely ugly sense of entitlement on their part that everything should be chewed for them as a viewer to fit their perspective, and god forbid if it doesn't. The person making the video owes the viewer nothing whatsoever. It's the viewer's responsibility to watch the video and think critically (no that does not mean blindly calling people shills) that means identifying accurately the points they have issues with, comparing and contrasting with other pieces of information (no not just other channels but maybe online articles, spec sheets) and then making a determination based on that critical thinking process ... the outcome then is "this camera is for me / this camera is not for me for the following thought-out reasons". Sure they can evaluate the usefulness of a video creator for them as an individual and choose to no longer view their videos but that remains a personal decision that doesn't need to be blown out of proportion. Chris and Jordan or any of the other camera channels are not journalists IMO (and that is not knocking what they do). They are media creators who cover camera topics (including but not exclusively new releases esp if you watched some of their DPReview stuff). The Petapixel news section on the Petapixel website could constitute as journalism but afaik it's written by other people. The level of "ethics in journalism" outrage about the Panasonic S9 release (which smells a lot like the Gamergate nonsense, for those who had to endure that trash pile in the 2010s) would be justified if aimed at a war journalist faking a photo or a scientist plagiarizing someone else's work ... ok there are real serious stakes with that ... but a camera, a consumer product? ... come on. And people implying that marketing practices are these new shocking things ... that's absolutely hypocritical ... guaranteed that (conservatively) 50% of people complaining and calling creators sellouts, would give their left nut to go on a trip if offered ... we don't live in the Soviet Union where an official communiqué tells you everything you need to know ... we live in capitalism and marketing is the excitement engine of the free market ... deal with it and learn how to process different viewpoints and sources of information ... You, the viewer, has to do the work of chosing and discarding information based on your needs.
@Kevon4202 ай бұрын
Video game companies used to fly out journalists and pundits from around the world to various cities like Rome, Italy just to sit and hotel and play an unfinished video game on a TV in a banquet hall. That is something that 100% be done anywhere but still happened. The issue is that this used to happen for decades before there were pretty 4K videos posted online for all to see about said trip. It was born out of print magazines having a long lead time and of course all these publications for various places would congregate to one location and all see a presentation and spend time covering a launch of whatever thing and have time to write up and refine their thoughts in a newspaper or magazine. Now the world has moved onto video content and far more immediate forms of communication and the optics of it to common consumers is different even the practice is mostly identical (now it’s a lot more basic) to how it was decades ago.
@MaximoJoshua2 ай бұрын
@@Mamotreco I think, even in this video, Jordan and Chris would say they are journalists, and hold themselves to those standards. There is a reason why the FTC requires disclosures for any financial relationship between company and influencer.
@Carthodon2 ай бұрын
@@Mamotreco I have two main issues with your argument. As a guy who is far removed from the product in question, I have to rely to some extent on what other people say. This isn't like an experiment where I can independently validate easily, validation mostly means comparing what one reviewer says against another. If all of them are uttering the same error, it would be difficult to notice. Which leads to the second problem you completely ignored that I had pointed out. Just because you have a bunch of small-time creators does not mean they are less capable of toeing the line than Pravda. I'm not exactly an expert on cameras to give a camera example but in journalism in general I think you can come up with a bunch of examples where wholesale journalists from independent news media companies were repeating the same, ultimately untrue thing. In a world where people prioritize self-interest, and each person's interest is very similar to every other person's, one set of incentives can make everyone function in tandem.
@Mamotreco2 ай бұрын
@@Carthodon you make very good points in your follow up comment. You are the first person to reply to a comment of mine on this issue where I can find common ground 👍
@karlc.57862 ай бұрын
It appears that you guys are quite indoctrinated. If you really want to understand the point Gerald was making I would recommend reading "Manufacturing Consent" by Herman and Chomsky
@ZenRus2 ай бұрын
With regards to Gerald Undone video, I think you are missing the point totally. It’s not about the free trip up, it’s about the selection of people who goes up and the dissonance of the quality of product they are releasing. No doubt it’s their PR prerogative to choose people who will be favourable to their released camera, but the dissonance comes when it’s not a good camera but so many embargo video says neutral to good things about it. I love your review, Chris and Jordan have been and will always be impartial to the reviews even on the S9 case. But you see, it’s their PR strategy, they know they cannot get away with everyone saying positive stuffs about the subpar s9, so they cherry picked a few good reviewers to go on about it who will point out the flaws of the camera. At the end of the day, the backlash from Gerald undone wasn’t because of Gerald, so many people encourage him to make the video cause everyone suspect the S9 reviews are too good to be true. No viewfinder, no shutter, no hot shoe mount, flat grip design, is this the 90s? Fujifilm launched the x100vi to great heights cause it was a camera that everyone went, yes it’s good, so even when so many people were given the trip up, the people on the ground didn’t mind, cause it is a great product. Donald Trump while being president also cherry picked a few news outlet, that was not ok, so how is this ok? This S9 saga deserves to be called out. If not, camera manufacturers are just going to slap old tech into retro body and market it as new with cherry picked reviews. Just like insta360 saga, has to be called out.
@bladerealm1242 ай бұрын
Well said. I think they missed the point too and I'd like to see a follow-up on this topic after they see everyone's comments.
@falxonPSN2 ай бұрын
Generally I tend to agree with most of your guys' approaches, but I have to say that the view on assuming people know things are paid trips is 100% wrong. Anytime you have a relationship with a brand for co-marketing or for payments that have occurred or any kind of in-kind exchange, you should clearly state that unambiguously at the very very front of the video each and every time. There's no downside to doing it, and it just makes you more transparent and ethical. Also, on the whole "camera jail" thing, you failed to mention the fact that when companies act like that by treating your negative comments punitively and not inviting you on the next trip or not sending an early camera to you that (especially for newer creators) they are fundamentally affecting your ability to compete with other channels and get the views/clicks/revenue. It's OK for a company to be offended by a negative response, but they should be held to a high standard where they do not restrict future invites/participation as a result of it. That is also very bad behavior. And saying "companies do it all the time" is really not an excuse.
@njnelson2 ай бұрын
The bigger question in my mind is the aspect of affiliate links, isn't it in the creators best interest to show a glowing review or preview so they hopefully get more affiliate purchases? I have felt that many times that seems to be what drives so many people to make videos on the same device/item. I may be wrong but if creating a glowing review = more revenue from affiliate links I'm sure that must effect creators content at least to a degree, right?
@DanYosua2 ай бұрын
This is certainly an area in which to evaluate any given creator's level of integrity. And it could manifest as overly positive reviews like you describe. Or in a few other flavors. It could also result in shelving an otherwise interesting video topic, or a more negative review (videos they would ordinary be excited to make) if they don't align well with affiliate programs that they are in. OR the opposite too - making a video they wouldn't otherwise make because of a great affiliate program.
@vrapan2 ай бұрын
affiliate links, company relations, increased views (more people will watch a positive than an openly negative review) which then translates to more sponsorhips... it goes on and on. It is a fact of youtube none of these people are journalists they are entertainers trying to make a living. View the content in that light and you will be much less easily misled.
@paulhancock2 ай бұрын
That is clearly a massive conflict of interest, with literally a monetary incentive to give positive reviews. I agree... That's definitely more of a concern. Reviewers' content being sponsored by a camera company is also strange to me.
@robert_may2 ай бұрын
I kinda had this argument with myself recently when starting to add affiliate links to my videos, although my main argument against them is that they're a right hassle to set up and I hate doing it for the £2.50 I might make from them a year from now 😆 I can say that, at least for me, they have no influence on what I make videos on. Sponsorships are a more difficult one for me, and something I'm personally quite against putting in my videos. a) I hate watching sponsor reads myself, and b) it feels like much more of a conflict of interest if I've previously said something critical about that product, especially as it's then me using my voice to say something totally different. Now, if someone comes along and offers me a briefcase full of cash, would that change my mind? Probably not, but a nice problem to have I guess? 😅 And I'll add the following for clarity: that's not to say that I begrudge others for taking sponsorships or doing ad reads. Who am I to judge the decisions others make? Everyone's situation is different.
@njnelson2 ай бұрын
@robert_may Agreed, I am someone who uses affiliate links as well but like you mentioned they don't have a specific bearing on the videos I create. Great thoughts about sponsorship spots also!
@hanumanguy2 ай бұрын
The biggest winner in all of this is Camera Conspiracies - long live Casey
@lionheart44242 ай бұрын
Ah yes, the "lenses should have 3D pop but Toneh bad" guy.
@fofopho2 ай бұрын
😂😂
@Lu-sj6ni2 ай бұрын
really? the absolute worst of the KZfaqrs? lol
@hanumanguy2 ай бұрын
@@Lu-sj6ni LOL is the point of his channel.
@Lu-sj6ni2 ай бұрын
@@hanumanguy nah, that dude's an actual goofy.
@shammyh2 ай бұрын
Lots of copium going on here. "It might sway other people's opinions... But not ours!!". Least you could do is follow the FTC guidance about disclosure. And what is the value to the consumer? Exactly? Of these events? Versus just waiting to get a retail copy of a camera a bit later? Hmm???
@robert_may2 ай бұрын
I mean, they did at least answer that in the video. People are now making purchasing decisions in a very different way, preordering months in advance. For products like the X100VI, where the wait list is gonna be immense, lots of people want to know whether they should put their name down or not. That’s partly down to camera companies now offering preorders in that way, but still, there is a demand for pre-release coverage.
@shammyh2 ай бұрын
The X100VI is a bit of an unrepresentative situation though, isn't it? And I suspect most "I'll just pre-order it" decisions are made off manufacturer-provided price & specs, not "preview" reviews. So, I'll ask again... Is there value to the consumer to getting a highly biased early take? Where reviewers have only limited to time to draw conclusions (and no RAWs or final firmware)... Or is the actual consumer advocating perspective to wait for a proper full production unit, then give an unbiased review. I'll also add... Although I do like and generally trust Jordan/Chris... Humans are historically *terrible* at identifying and mitigating their own biases. Especially so when there are other monetary and business incentives mixed in.
@robert_may2 ай бұрын
@@shammyh There’s certainly other cases too - I personally preordered the Nikon 180-600 and would have cancelled it if early coverage said it was naff. I do think it’s becoming a more common situation lately. Again personally, I think the quest for unbiased reviews is essentially impossible. Instead I embrace the honest biased review. As long as each reviewer is basically consistent with their own opinions, and is at least honest with themselves about their biases, I’m more than happy to use them as a reference point.
@owenrodgers80202 ай бұрын
As above, they talked about this. It's because people preorder cameras these days partly because of the shrinking market camera manufacturers want to know how many to make before they make them. If you have a problem with this scenario, you can't trust 98% of media, on any category for the past 60 years. Every media outlet or entity has advertising on products based on the sector they cover, because that's how advertising works. Car magazines have ads for car related products, fishing has fishing, boating has boating, gaming has gaming. Does this mean we have to ignore bad or very obviously biased reviews? No. Does it mean every word said by everyone all the time is BS? No With anybody in the media (covering the whole spectrum) we have to decide who we trust on what issue/segment.
@Roland3142 ай бұрын
I have been watching you guys since the early days of the Camera Store channel, and I love you. Genuinely, you are one of the few channels I subscribe to because I feel like you guys are honest and do a good job of giving reviews that discuss the good and the bad. I also am a big fan of Gerald's for the same reason. Ultimately, what I want to talk about (and wish had been touched on more here) is the responsibility to the viewers. Listening to this episode...I will be honest, you guys come off as very defensive. I know there's been a lot of heat around Gerald's video and that there are reasonable places to disagree. However, I think Gerald's larger point about trust is well-founded. There are a LOT of channels (not you, thankfully) which feel like they are regurgitating press releases and are just there as hype machines. I avoid those channels, but I know quite a few of them that do very well. And, look at what happened to MKBHD recently when he was overly critical of a product that wasn't good: people attacked him for not towing a company line. Gerald's video was not directed at you, but I think there is an essential truth about how brands can use access to "work the refs" into providing more favorable coverage. Companies will vary in how aggressive they are about it, and it'll work better with some reviewers than others. While I do think that, generally, Gerald comes off as a bit more blunt, if a company is hesitant to bring him to a press event because of that I'd LIKE to know that, frankly. It's their right to invite who they'd like, but it's also his right to call them out for it. There are certainly real people on both sides, but these are companies with large enough budgets to hold events like this, and that gives them power. Consumers, on the other hand, often have to save up for months or years to afford this equipment. As an amateur filmmaker, I know this firsthand: I used both videos from you and Gerald to help guide my purchases and benefited from honest, varying perspectives. There is a real danger when too many channels get caught up in hype that it will be the consumers who will suffer the real consequences of buying into a bad product with their limited resources. And yes, certainly this isn't the first time this has come up. But it's necessary to bring up issues like this every once and awhile because people become complicit over time. It may be old-hat to you, but I am certain that there are many for whom Gerald's video was eye-opening. So, while I appreciate your point of view, and that you should (justifiably) be proud of the work and reputation you've built, I wish you'd given a more thoughtful response that wasn't so defensive. This was one of the few times you guys let me down. I still think you're great, but it feels like you missed the real reason why what Gerald said matters, and good opportunity to discuss what actually matters here.
@bladerealm1242 ай бұрын
100% exactly how I felt. This discussion was defensive with almost no real insight on problems with the industry practices and just "we've always done things this way and we think it's okay." Chris and Jordan are my favorite youtubers but this discussion felt like they missed the point of Gerald's video completely. I'd love to see a follow-up episode taking into account responses from commentors and a way deeper discussion on the industry as a whole, how things could be different, ethics, etc.
@irridiastarfire2 ай бұрын
You said this better than I did. Thank you!
@MurakamiFan2 ай бұрын
if any S9 video title says "almost" and/or "perfect". you know to stay away from that creator from now on
@stkuj2 ай бұрын
Gerald is 1000% right!
@kistovisback2 ай бұрын
Neah bro, these launches are a clown show. Not your fault, no need to single anyone out for blame, but they're a clown show. Saying that "it's been like this in auto since ever" means nothing. That's no standard to aspire to.
@testcams2 ай бұрын
Jaron, @21:20 You question Gerald's contention of not being invited because the camera "isn't for him", by highlighting how Chris and Jordan were invited even after being told the same thing, and you conclude @ 21:43 with "it's obviously not true". Are you saying Gerald is not being truthful when he relayed how he was told by Panasonic he wasn't being invited because the camera wasn't for him, and how Panasonic told him others weren't being invited for the same reason?
@BootStrapTurnerVideography2 ай бұрын
I thought it was because of his S5 review "The PANASONIC S5: A STRANGE but POWERFUL Camera" and that the execs in charge of invites didn't invite him for the word "strange" and that even glowing reviews of the S5II (provided by Lumix USA) and S5IIX didn't seem to help. Kudo's to Lumix USA marketing team, but Lumix Japan could do way better.
@testcams2 ай бұрын
@@BootStrapTurnerVideography Gerald said his "S5 Strange but powerful" review is why Panasonic didn't invite him to the S5 II/IIx event. He said the reason he wasn't invited to the S9 event was because the S9 wasn't a camera for him, as told directly to him by Panasonic.
@niccollsvideo2 ай бұрын
I can’t say what conversation was had between them but listening to the live stream that Sean Robinson did it sounds like there is now some disagreement on that statement and the reason why Gerald didn’t go. I would also add that in our best and worst of series we have given worst product of the year to Panasonic once or twice and they have still asked us to do more. In my experience they have appreciated our opinions, good or bad.
@PetaPixel2 ай бұрын
Adding to what Chris wrote, this is worth a read: petapixel.com/2024/05/28/panasonic-reacts-to-controversy-concerning-its-lumix-s9-event/ Specifically this quote: “I just want to say apparently my invite wasn’t really clearly received by everyone that I spoke to.”
@testcams2 ай бұрын
@@PetaPixel Chris and Jaron, thanks. Jaron, the fact you reach out to these companies and give them a chance to respond to these controversies is commendable . It's nice to see actual journalistic practices being employed in this space. I just read your article and found Panasonic's official response a bit mealy-mouthed. Gerald's accusation is quite damning, so for Panasonic to imply miscommunication strikes me as insincere. Even if Panasonic didn't explicitly say "We're not inviting you because the camera is not for you" as Gerald contends, surely they must have at least mentioned it during the conversation, which means it was on Panasonic's mind and so it's fair that Gerald drew that conclusion. The only other explanation is that Gerald completely imagined the comment was ever made.
@bleen25112 ай бұрын
"We tried to disclose it"-but you didn't! What's so hard about saying 'the trip is sponsored by Lumix' in your video anyway? It's ok to make mistakes, but being unable to be honest after the mistake was pointed out to you is a giant red flag.
@jonathand8272 ай бұрын
It was a chosen decision. They knew what they were doing. It’s very unfortunate.
@mrfroopy2 ай бұрын
I agreee with Gerald. Camera companies don't provide this because of good will. They know that those trips do influence the subconcious of the KZfaqrs.
@ItsWillLee2 ай бұрын
The difference between a company/business doing legit reviews of products (aka Popular Mechanics) VS a "KZfaqr/influencer"😅...it's just not the same lol
@Noojtxeeg2 ай бұрын
It's marketing expense. It's not a review, it's a first look. The purpose of the expense is not for good will, it's to get the product known.
@quentin62332 ай бұрын
So what. Every company on the planet does this or something similar. Gerald is naive to think otherwise. Exactly what do you guys think a marketing managers job is. This is precisely why company like Nike has teams running around with their shoes on. I played college football and we were a nike school and we got free gear all the time and it heavily influenced people to buy Nike apparel. You think seeing a football player in a still photo on a magazine cover with a Nike shoe or Nike merchandise that was given to him for free wasn't part of the marketing strategy. You think Nike was thinking about goodwill or was it money and growing their marketshare.
@thissidetowardscreen45532 ай бұрын
I think the challenge is optics of these sort of trips, the inundation of videos all at once, the clamber for attention, the sometimes exaggerated titles to get clicks and the majority of reviews felt a lot of the flaws of the S9 was over looked and information was left out. Flaws turned into quirks. I was shocked how much LUTS was mentioned as if that was the entire purpose of the camera. I wonder if this LUTS thing is going to be turned into a money grab or since you can upload LUTS to the app, what is going to stop people from uploading bought LUTS for free for everyone avoiding the cost of buying them? Lots of questions regarding integrity has been brought to the forefront. I think it is a wake up call and I don't think content creator should take it as an attack, but more of opportunity to look at how things are presented and how the optics may look to the general public and viewers.
@stevenqirkle2 ай бұрын
Just disclose and I have no problem with any of it. Are they paying you or have they ever paid you? Did they give you a free camera, did they loan a review unit, or did you buy it yourself? Were you granted exclusive early access to the product? Did they pay for transportation or accommodation? Any extravagant meals or entertainment? I feel like you can easily cover it all in less than a minute. And yes it really matters to me. I will stop watching a review if it’s not clear what their relationship is to the company, and unsubscribe/block a channel who I think is being intentionally misleading.
@-grey2 ай бұрын
I'm not tied up in first-look and review semantics, because honestly there are so many cameras like the S9 that don't get a fair shake after a couple days of use from reviewers that is only really fully trust a review from an owner who used it extensively over time. Everything else is surface level spec talk and some examples. I think the S9 would be a great camera for me, because I prefer compact over EVF and pro features. I shoot the Ricoh GRIII and love the idea of the Z30 or EOS M6II also. All great cameras for my use cases. The Ricoh GRIII especially takes a lot of time to really understand the value it provides with the intelligent quick fire shooting modes, yet all you hear is non-full frame, slow f2.8, bad AF, no EVF - buy X100.
@headwerkn2 ай бұрын
I do wonder if this any of this would have gone down if the LUMIX S9 had actually been a good camera? 😂 Mad respect to you guys for all that you do and do well, but I find myself agreeing with Gerald on this one. Point being, he’s not an industry magazine or website equivalent but an individual who’s build an audience and ‘brand’ on his reputation as a highly detailed, technical and ‘nerdy’ reviewer centred on the video-centric KZfaqr-Content Creator space - which clearly is a huge and influential market these days. He’s carved out a niche doing the kinds of review that other reviewers don’t do: given that many other reviewers just defer to Gerald’s for ‘that kind of info’ rather proves his effectiveness and the fact few others are willing to put in the work that he does. The fact is, he’s built a pretty influential reputation on being thorough, fair and honest - anything that risks that risks both his professional online presence and personal image. This is the same for any individual KZfaq review channel - that’s all they’ve got, their reputation based on a parasocial relationship with an audience who treats them like a trusted confidante. It’s safe to say Gerald has been the king of full disclosure (to the point I can recite his standard boilerplate off the top of my head). I think the main crux of his argument wasn’t that Panasonic were being jerks or anyone posting a positive review after a all-bills-paid trip is a shill, hardly that all… but that KZfaq reviewers find themselves walking a near-impossible tightrope between maintaining credibility with their audience while maintaining access to manufacturers products. Big players might have some grace but up-and-comers certainly don’t. And yeah, I noticed a bunch of much smaller channels doing the LUMIX trip and posting mostly positive reviews of a camera that by all objective measure is either undercooked or overpriced.
@j.f.75092 ай бұрын
"We try to disclose it" LOL C'mon Chris, you barely do it if you do it at all! Are drinks also part of "logistics"? You guys were, and still are, camera salespersons. Gerald tries to be somehow different, more like Popular Photography and Modern Photography were back in the good ol' days when we had good factual data to use as a basis for our photo equipment choices.
@cba20k2 ай бұрын
39:54 Gerald Undone reviews are rude? Please point to one.
@jonathand8272 ай бұрын
They’re so butthurt 😅
@Roland3142 ай бұрын
@@jonathand827 I love Gerald, but I could see how he might come off as rude to some. I don't think he's actually being rude, but he is sometimes very blunt. He had his then-partner (now wife) helping him at a trade show once and pointed out in the video a mistake she made. Again, I don't think he meant it to be mean or cruel, just matter-of-fact, but a lot of people would find it rude. That being said, I love Gerald and generally think his video was on-the-mark.
@andyemmett99302 ай бұрын
For me it’s about trust between me and the reviewer, there are only 2 reviewers I actually trust (you guys are one of them), it’s way to easy for people to make a false video because either a company is putting the pressure on to not say anything bad about a product, or if they are a new reviewer, they could be scared that they might upset a brand
@logtothebase22 ай бұрын
Ever was it thus, back in the day special interest and hobby products revolved around hard copy magazine periodicals sold in newsagents, substantially paid for by adverts from the very manufacturers products they were reviewing in the same issue. That still is the case. Is there conflict of interest? of course there is, reviewers need to get paid. But they also want to keep their audience, not calling out faults and poor performance will see them loose credibility readership and audience.
@GT-hk8dy2 ай бұрын
Condescending response to Gerald's video, almost as if you guys are defending yourself and missing his point. Simple answer is no, it's not ethical in this case if the company pays for your whole trip to court you into shilling their product and getting on their good side for their "market strategy" or whatever they call it. Nobody knows if you actually disclose these things. His point was on transparency though, and it's absolutely true. I respect Gerald even more now lol, he has the balls to call these things out and the stirring controversy seems to have worked.
@bladerealm1242 ай бұрын
It's wild to see the complete disconnect with youtubers (defensive) responses to this whole subject downplaying the benefits they're receiving (and that the product is receiving with more favorable and disingenuous reviews). Their viewers continue to emphasize why they feel the way they do and how these youtubers are completely missing the point.
@carboncut2 ай бұрын
Sensor dust has been the major issue for me with the m43 compact fixed-lens bodies, like really really bad sensor dust.
@robert_may2 ай бұрын
I'm really surprised more companies haven't put sensor shields in cameras. The Z9 has it and it's fantastic - I've not had a single bit of dust on the sensor in over a year. Meanwhile I've had to do a serious clean of my S5IIX after a single day out where I swapped lenses a lot 😅
@matthieuzglurg60152 ай бұрын
I think that there is two very different approaches to tech review stuff. The first is to do what you guys do : work hand in hand with camera brands, share feedback, get early access, and give your opinion in a fair and objective manner. This is a very good way of doing things but there is a few caveats : the first one is that you need to be established and respected. Camera brands (Lumix could be one, but honestly a lot of brands have been guilty of this) will not hesitate to remove someone from their media list if what they say is not in line with what they think they should hear. If you're a well respected outlet like you guys, you have pretty much nothing to worry about : what you will say about a camera will always be as objective as you can be, and people will trust your judgement on a particular product. Similarly, brands know that since you're viewed as largely unbiased and fair, so they are more willing to give you products to test out for free (that you need to send back after ofc), to fly you over to test stuff ect. A small creator in the same position might think twice before saying anything too negative or negative enough that the sales rep would not like it. Bottom line, it's very good for established outlets, and really not painting new small creators in a good light as a lot of them end up lacking objectivity as a result. The second way of doing things is to be an ethical junkie : you don't want to be associated with any brand that way people can't say that you're biased, no matter if you're an established media or a small creator. This is THE best and most objective way of reviewing anything. If you get big enough, brands might send you stuff regardless, because the same situation as the first way of reviewwing applies. But this is not what dictates what you review or how you review anything. The disadvantage of this methos is that you either have to buy the stuff you're testing, or find a 3rd party (like a camera store) to lend you stuff, and that's not always practical or possible. But the huge advantage of it is that it's really easy to keep your ethics straight : just never accept anything coming from a company when it comes to gifts, free products ect. I'm mostly familiar with the computer hardware reviewing scene, and the same kind of problematic applies, except it's Nvidia, Intel, Asus this time and they do not give a single f*** about banning major and trusted sources : latest in date I think was Nvidia straight up banning Hardware Unboxed from their media list because they didn't like some comments they made about ray tracing in games (and the fact that it still wasn't very used). And In this space, there is some outlets that play by the brands rules, get sent products, do sponsored content and get flown for press events and stuff (like LTT for example), and there is super serious "ethics are everything" people that will buy every piece of tech they test and put it through a lot of rigorous testing (like Gamers Nexus). Both have their place, but there is DEFINITELY a lot more red lines to cross by playing by a brand's rule book, especially if you're a smaller creator. As someone that is a measurement and test technician IRL, that have been watching hardware and camera content for years, that have dabbled into PC component reviewing and recently looked into reviewing cameras I can tell you that there is really strong arguments for the second approach when it comes to smaller creators. Maybe once you're big enough you can go back to the first method, but I think that there is a lot of points where Gerald hit the nail on the head in his video, especially for small to medium creators. His "callout" was really for bigger media outlets to realize that they do have an influence on the medium and smaller ones, and always push them at being there on launch day "to get the views", sometimes at the cost of ethics and personal integrity (even if you, as a larger media are not anywhere close to this).
@hanumanguy2 ай бұрын
Well explained.
@plusgood152 ай бұрын
Re review it!!
@PhotoTrekr2 ай бұрын
If anyone feels that they shouldn't go on these trips, I'll be glad to go in your place. 🤣
@zand2 ай бұрын
Will confirm I've seen Chris and Jordan working their asses off while others were definitely enjoying the sun and some cold beers.
@russia2742 ай бұрын
We all know that. Point being access to the gear that generates content for the channel. Think 1 layer deeper.
@senseofeverthing2 ай бұрын
I love the Idea of some re-reviews! How obout also re-reviewing the old RX100 III/IV cameras?
@costafilh0Ай бұрын
We should just stop using the word "REVIEW" for "FIRST IMPRESSIONS" content. And yes, there will always be bias. If your paid for trip is a VERY BAD experience, you will have a negative bias towards the product because that will be your mental state at that moment, no matter how professional, cold and soulless you try to be.
@SlotCarNewsOfficial2 ай бұрын
We try to disclose it, some serious compium there, like an offensive amount. This must be disclosed.
@johnp12 ай бұрын
I wish you guys mentioned the fact that Gerald Undone was not offered the trip to Japan. It would have saved me the trouble looking for his video. I think such press trips benefit users like me. I'm often eager to learn about new products. However, I'd like to get the info from the reviewers and not from the marketing materials. Your reviews (including first impressions) are pretty balanced. You guys are good at expressing negative opinions without using negative words. Love the podcast.
@DanYosua2 ай бұрын
I think KZfaq could lean in here a bit, and it would be low hanging fruit. I'd love to have some sort of standardized "first look"/"review"/"long term review" tags. And maybe some more granularity for the paid promotion label too like "product"/"payment"/"loaner"/"travel or experience". Not everyone is going to use them, some might abuse them, but having the option and making it easy would be nice.
@StrangelyIronic2 ай бұрын
I see people playing review copies of games and there's a very clear #AD before the title that's a tag.
@DanYosua2 ай бұрын
@@StrangelyIronic That's interesting to hear what other niches do. And that way is certainly clear 😂
@tombuck2 ай бұрын
I agree 100% and also hi Dan!
@DanYosua2 ай бұрын
@@tombuck haha hi Tom 👋
@hanumanguy2 ай бұрын
Good suggestion. Brand trips should be marked sponsored. Geeky Nerdy Tech marked his video sponsored - very honest and he commented that there is no way that it shouldn't be considered sponsored when they got all their expenses paid. A long term loan if assessed as a rental would run into hundreds of dollars.
@frstesiste76702 ай бұрын
In my opinion Jaron kind of ask the wrong questions about the Fujifilm 500mm for GFX. If you just look at where it will outperform other systems it will always loose (at least with the current GFX bodies). The GFX system seem to be fairly popular among landscape photographers though and since they are out there anyway it's hard to imagine that they don't get many opportunities for wildlife or wildlife in the landscape shots where a 500mm would be super useful.
@srmcclellen2 ай бұрын
While I’m somewhere below a novice photographer I really like camera talk, reviews & first looks. I love your guys’s content and have watched since the camera-store days. A new release junket like the S9 reveal, are my favorite ones because I get to see a beautiful video exposé with you guys revealing a new product at an interesting location. As someone who has watched you guys for a long time, I have never and would never question your honesty or integrity. In terms of the particular product, the S9 sounds like a fun camera and is the first full frame that’s interested me, particularly because I am only interested in pocket sized cameras and I’m not a camera savant. To me the S9 is an extension of the LX100, RX100, GX9, PENF, evolution. A point & shoot experience with good image quality and limited camera expertise required. There is a lot of camera snobbery and shaming in photography that I don’t get and I’m not interested in. The things missing from the S9 are things I don’t need or use. I want a camera that’s fun, reliable, easy use, small and light, has excellent image quality and it needs to offer some benefits over a phone. Though I wish it were cheaper and will have to wait until it reaches the secondary market. As far as the “controversy” goes, I loved the discussion. Though I’m only 43, sometimes I am reminded just how old I am. Keep on keeping on and keep up the great work!
@SamPho2 ай бұрын
Just a note on the compressed RAW to save space, if you use Lightroom, the Ai denoise will not work at present. So if you plan on using this feature instead of the standard denoise you'll need to shoot full size RAWs
@Ildskalli2 ай бұрын
Good to know!
@the_wiki94082 ай бұрын
I don't know man, none of that S9 review gave me the impression that Panasonic was calling the shots or influencing the outcome.
@hanumanguy2 ай бұрын
The fact that they took over the conversation on photography KZfaq for about 10 days should tell you something, that's what the $500,000 + spend was for. Also they don't have to call the shots, Cialdini persausion principle of reciprocity - when you show kindness to someone, they feel obligated to return it.
@USGrant21st2 ай бұрын
Are you saying Panasonic marketing department is so inept they don't care whether they spend their budget on things that are not helping company sales?
@Ildskalli2 ай бұрын
@@hanumanguy That was thanks to Gerald's temper tantrum, not their press event.
@hanumanguy2 ай бұрын
@@Ildskalli calling criticism of the recent launch, and influencer camera marketing in general tantrum, hate, jealousy etc. shows a lack of self-awareness which is part of the problem.
@Ildskalli2 ай бұрын
@@hanumanguy He had some valid criticism in the first half of his video, but the second is a pathetic temper tantrum directed at Lumix USA.
@pdcorlis2 ай бұрын
Influencers be circling the wagons… They got caught with their hand in the cookie jar.
@hanumanguy2 ай бұрын
I hope they keep making videos bashing their followers. Not talking about these guys but some of the others. Keep digging influencers!
@the_wiki94082 ай бұрын
Ironically the most biased reviewers are often the people that spend their own money on the products. Look up confirmation bias and choice-supportive bias. It's the very basis of "fanboy-ism".
@jamesloop2 ай бұрын
I’m in complete agreement that paid trips and free “long term loaners” should be disclosed, but generally I think this whole thing is a bunch of hand wringing nonsense. Gerald started a “poop storm” by framing his lack of an invite or prerelease loaner as punitive (first s5ii and now s9). But geez, Panasonic gets to decide who they send their cameras to, or who they spend money on to bring to Japan. If I were them I wouldn’t want to spend any money on someone who sits on the couch the whole time talking shop with other creators, without making a preview video of the product. And most reviewers I saw stated pretty clearly what they were given (the trip, loaner camera). The s9 is a great camera for the target audience. I don’t understand why Panasonic and the creators they work with are getting so much flak. People are making things personal when this is all just pretty basic business logistics.
@LoverOfTech2 ай бұрын
Now this is one episode I wish I was on loool
@niccollsvideo2 ай бұрын
Definitely one day my friend!!
@raymondpenalver70952 ай бұрын
I for one would love chris to become the boss of Pentax, yes please 🙏
@hoihoisan7772 ай бұрын
Hopefully OM Systems gets inspired to release a new Pen-F🙏🙂
@Trevellian2 ай бұрын
Jordan, Chris, and Petapixel need to NAME and SHAME the next time a camera company puts them in the doghouse for an honest review. The only way to change the camera maker's awful behavior is to tell your viewers and readers when a camera company punishes you. And yes, actually reveal the NAME of the camera firm. The Japanese camera makers would see that as rude? Perhaps. But being put in the doghouse for an honest review is *exceptionally* rude.
@Strider_Shinryu2 ай бұрын
Yeah, basically share the thought of a lot of others in the comments. Was it obvious/likely that the trip was paid for by the company? Sure, but that doesn't mean you can just "forget" to disclose it. Even if there are no legal implications (though in some areas there are, as pointed out by many others), it's just the right thing to do. Now, as for me, I don't believe that the paid for trip influenced the perspectives put forth in the video. I mean, you guys clearly weren't exactly blown away by the camera and that was pretty clear. And I do believe you don't just see it as a vacation that someone else paid for. Still, though, you can't deny that for at least some people the fact the trip was paid for including the whining and dining WOULD/COULD influence opinions, even if just because they didn't want to step on toes so that they'd be offered another trip in the future. Not saying you guys should refuse all such niceties in the future or anything but you definitely should always disclose all of the details and, if/when possible, you should at least pay for your travel expenses out of pocket even if you do accept the invite to the event.
@rewdotkim2 ай бұрын
There's a lot to take in with all of this, but at the end of the day my biggest question for reviewers of any kind of product is: If there is no fear of consequences from the manufacturers / vendors, would that product's review be at all any different than the review given for the same product, but instead the manufacturer / vendor provides a trip / lodging / meals / experience on their dime? This is especially important to consider for the newer reviewers who might more easily be enthralled by marketing shine, wine and dine...and might be more inclined to give a favorable review to stay in a manufacturer / vendor's good graces.
@MaximoJoshua2 ай бұрын
I wish we could see both versions...the version where they bought the camera themselves and reviewed it on their own, compared to the version where they were flown to japan and given the camera as a long term loaner. I think its pretty naive to expect those two reviews to be identical.
@rewdotkim2 ай бұрын
@@MaximoJoshua Agreed -- that would be interesting to see. And, true -- it might be naive to expect the same, the very fact that we can't expect the same reveals the potential influence a "sponsored" review will show.
@Raist3db2 ай бұрын
The fundamental problem is here is that as good intended as you want to be, the fact a company (any) pays for a trip and accommodations will bias you in some way (this is basic human psychology and conflict of interest concepts). I am not even talking about potential products then that such companies will exert. Then we have a mix of influencers and ambassadors (ambassadors obviously are acting as sales people) and the fact the message is created to drill on the minds of viewers why this camera is good and ignore some negative aspects. At some point the whole thing starts to become more and more obvious, and to an extent starts to becoming disrespectful as it feels like people are selling a product in very subtle ways. I think this is part of this backlash. I will say specifically for the Lumix S9 now, I was a bit surprised by how relatively critical some of the early takes were (in a good way I meant that) but I still saw a few that were overly positive and completely glossing over some rather important short comings and why they are important (i.e. lack of mechanical shutter as a good example). And I saw very few bringing into the conversation, and why not- ask Panasonic point blank- why not make a GM5 successor instead for MFT- having all the small lenses ready, with LUT capabilities. The whole thing also reeks of mass consumerism which also has become more trite as other priorities in the world have gone up since the COVID "mental reset" and inflation, and I think that brings another level of a point: I think people maybe are starting to get an underlying GEAR fatigue as way way too much videos are all talking about GEAR and *not* Photography (which is what these tools are for). In the end a lot of this has an inherent conflict of interest. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest www.researchgate.net/publication/227516071_The_Moral_Psychology_of_Conflicts_of_Interest_Insights_from_Affective_Neuroscience I think there is value in having influences and ambassadors show new features and workflows. I tend to put less value when everything is too overly positive or in particular- when they put down a competitor in the presentation. If it's a news site, I expect them to ask questions (like why not a successor to GM5, etc.).
@krishnakumarr96192 ай бұрын
REVIVE THE COOLPIXES, CYBERSHOTS, and a proper powershot this time.
@-grey2 ай бұрын
Canon G7XIV with DPAF please. 🙏 Nikon 1 J6 please.
@robmcd2 ай бұрын
I don’t care about the press trip. I care that the reviewers weren’t being honest about the camera. Comparing size and weight with a 26mm G8 lens to a 24-70 is a joke and just plain wong. The circle jerk in the comments of every video of other creators cheering was just weird and created an us vs them attitude which continued with the follow up vids and the lumix livestream
@cba20k2 ай бұрын
22:49 I respectfully disagree. There are KZfaqrs who cover their own costs at these press events to maintain impartiality. Doug Demuro comes to mind.
@alejandrocifuentesferreira61822 ай бұрын
Gerald is right
@cjenkins792 ай бұрын
The issue is that most people cant "remain true to what they are going to say about the product". If that weren't true then they wouldn't pay to to have everyone there. Why would a company pay to fly people to another country,feed them and put them up in hotels if.....they were going to say the exact same thing for free? The goal is clearly to influence. And most viewers are aware of that. The issue comes when people start to feel that the opinoins are clearly being influenced. I saw many KZfaqrs say the S9 was a fun extra camera. They have 2 - 3 other cameras this one is fun to play around with. Well the problem is they aren't looking at it from the viewers perspective. Clearly the S9 is aimed at being someones FIRST and ONLY camera. And at $1500 its not the best option. So if most KZfaqrs were simply handed the S9 and told its a $1500 camera they would've made very different videos with a much different take. So clearlly most people were influenced by the trip. Trying to hide behind "working hard" doesn't change the truth. The viewers are the reason KZfaqrs are in this position to begin with. A simply "my bad I'll try to do better" would be better than all the gaslighting.
@hanumanguy2 ай бұрын
Well said. One young reviewer said it was a great affordable option for beginners when I know that even a couple of years ago she was doing professional work with a Lumix G85 i.e. this camera would have been out of her reach when starting out. A G85 or G95 with kit lens is $700 or $800, I recommend something like that for a beginner! Chris Nichols has said in the comment that they will do better with disclosure in the future. Regards "working hard" , yes that's not an excuse for ethics, the mafia probably works hard!
@taylor10382 ай бұрын
I find this similar to how Linus Tech Tips is black listed by Apple because of how they can be critical of their devices. But this makes me much more likely to watch their videos for an unbiased take on tech since they don't care about keeping Apple in their good graces.
@Brightsparks19602 ай бұрын
Definately review the DLUX8 as there are some other spec changes already evident from the LX100ii with the changed 2.4M EVF and the 1.8M dot LCD screen. If it also gets a new processor that will be worth a review!
@christill2 ай бұрын
I would say the biggest ethical problem with these events is to fly people around the world totally unnecessarily. I recently heard about a cycling publication that has taken the decision to no longer send journalists to new model launches. And they’re absolutely correct to do so. I’m sure we’ll be seeing a lot more of that. The other aspect is whether or not the journalists / influencers are able to stay impartial (which I wouldn’t question with Chris and Jordan but would with many others).
@quentin62332 ай бұрын
How are you going to tell a company how they should be doing their own marketing. Who cares if that cycling company changed the way they do things. Every marketing company does things their own way. That location is thier headquarters for crying out loud. Companies have been paying people to attend press conferences at their headquarters for well over half a century or so. You guys cannot be serious.
@simonmaduxx67772 ай бұрын
@@quentin6233 Feelings over being practical.... sigh. Thier offices in the states probably suck, so let them come to Japan! Perish the thought.... wtf
@costafilh0Ай бұрын
Cool to see new Point & Shoot cameras. All they need is to be better than any high-end phone camera but with the camera body experience. If they are crap, doesn't matter who made them, the trend will end eventually, and they will all become just e-waste and shelf props, just like every old crappy Point & Shoot.
@haruhidaso8 күн бұрын
The problem with these press access is that, it works little too well. It 100% put the reviewers in a place where it’s beneficial to praise the product rather than criticize it, not to mention the psychological effect it has where you are testing these products during a fully paid trip which will naturally create better image within the reviewers’ head. It’s access journalism where criticizing the product will potentially cause you to not be called for the next event which will put you in a significant disadvantage compared to simply praising the product. Journalist can 100% be “honest” with their impression by mainly highlighting the positive aspect of the product and not focusing on the negative because they aren’t technically lying.
@ShaunakDe2 ай бұрын
My issue isn't with the press trips, but the long-standing relationship these creators have with the camera brands. Can I trust you to say the new gadget is bad, if the brand might punish you for doing that and not invite you to the next trip?
@TheThirdH2 ай бұрын
Pentax making mirrorless versions of their 31/43/77 lenses would be excellent… they could even make a wider lens and a longer lens in the end to further complete the set. They should join L-mount and make an affordable mirrorless Monochrom as well in a K1000 style body.
@MikeMena2 ай бұрын
Great discussion. I think what is going on here is conflating KZfaqr with journalist. I think Chris and Jordon are perceived as professional journalism, which is why they are still invited. Gerold is not perceived as a journalist and never claimed to be. So, I actually don’t think Gerald was talking about petapixel, but more so certain practices that make an “unbiased” review impossible, which has the effect of KZfaqrs being perceived as less trustworthy overall, which does not damage camera companies, but damages KZfaqrs in general.
@jonccwong2 ай бұрын
Yep been waiting for this episode ❤
@BrendanEvan2 ай бұрын
I’d watch a Dlux 8 review because it seems completely uncompetitive in todays market so I wanna see what you guys say