Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian
By definition Grim's tests can't be deemed valid considering how unreliable they are. Grim's tests have been so "imperfect" that they are essentially useless. Go back on RC and see where Grim, himself, has recognized that he needs to re-do his lamp "testing" to make it more reliable and valid. I appreciate that hobbyists take it upon themselves to try to objectively measure some of the things in our hobby but they tend to just bolster the perpetuation of misinformation under the guise of being "facts" obtained from "testing".
I don't expect to see randomized controlled trials for any of our equipment. But given the sketchy history of misinformation and poor "testing" done by many hobbyists I would be more inclined to base an equipment choice on anecdotal reports than misguided "testing". At least I know I won't be deluding myself into believing something that is dogma and I'll know that my decision is simply based on recommendations.
|
I see your point, but people like grim, although flawed in their research, have no financial incentive for skewing results. Give a light to a dealer to test, and hes gonna sit down and go, "Which one of these lights gives me the largest profit?" Every dealer I've EVER dealt with assures me their product is better than the other guys, and if he sells both, he'll tell you the more expensive one is better without fail