<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Panasonic DMC-FZ28 Sports 18x Optical Zoom</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/panasonic-dmc-fz28-sports-18x-optical-zoom/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/panasonic-dmc-fz28-sports-18x-optical-zoom/</link>
	<description>Upgrade Your Lifestyle</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 18:06:40 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Nick Drahos</title>
		<link>http://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/panasonic-dmc-fz28-sports-18x-optical-zoom/#comment-57086</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Drahos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:44:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-57086</guid>
		<description>The above is not a review per se.  Most reviewers miss the boat by merely re-writing mfgr&#039;s verbiage about a new camera.   A review should be a hands-on report.  Why not skip the hyperbolies and show people the nitty-gritty--photos shot by the camera?  Of the 25 or more Review sites I have visited, trying to find pix by the Panasonic DMC-fz28, only 3 or so show any.  To my chagrin, I had to turn to a UK site to find some and even there they were well hidden. To my surprize, the pix were not as sharp and true as those that I had seen taken by the Fz18.  Reviewers would do a great service if they would showcase actual photos that the camera takes.  After all, the bottom line that everybody wants to know is how sharp and how true to nature color photos are that the camera takes before they are lulled into spending their money. For example, reviewers tout the Nikon Coolpix P80 (THERE ARE OTHERS IN THE SAME CLASS) as one of the best and many will buy it because of its name.  But, if they could see its off coor pictures (to my eyes)  they would not buy it. Moreover, if the reviewer saw them, he could save the consumer a lot of disappointment and hard-earned money if he honestly reported what he experienced.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The above is not a review per se.  Most reviewers miss the boat by merely re-writing mfgr&#039;s verbiage about a new camera.   A review should be a hands-on report.  Why not skip the hyperbolies and show people the nitty-gritty&#8211;photos shot by the camera?  Of the 25 or more Review sites I have visited, trying to find pix by the Panasonic DMC-fz28, only 3 or so show any.  To my chagrin, I had to turn to a UK site to find some and even there they were well hidden. To my surprize, the pix were not as sharp and true as those that I had seen taken by the Fz18.  Reviewers would do a great service if they would showcase actual photos that the camera takes.  After all, the bottom line that everybody wants to know is how sharp and how true to nature color photos are that the camera takes before they are lulled into spending their money. For example, reviewers tout the Nikon Coolpix P80 (THERE ARE OTHERS IN THE SAME CLASS) as one of the best and many will buy it because of its name.  But, if they could see its off coor pictures (to my eyes)  they would not buy it. Moreover, if the reviewer saw them, he could save the consumer a lot of disappointment and hard-earned money if he honestly reported what he experienced.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
