WTF Consumer Reports?

I'm a fan of consumer reports. I buy their magazine. I subscribe to their website. Indeed, I read almost everything they produce.

That said, what the hell is up with their ratings of digital cameras? In the category of "SLR-like" cameras, in which goes all mirrorless models, the Panasonic GH3 tops the list. Alright. They specifically mention that GH3's exemplary video quality as a determining factor in putting it at the top. I can't much argue with that.

But the G5 comes in second? And the GH2 third? Both above the Olympus E-M5? Wha?

But wait! It gets weirder!

Just below the E-M5 is the Nikon J1! Seriously. A camera that has failed in the market and isn't taken seriously by any pros or enthusiasts as in their top ten.

All of these cameras are far above the likes of the Sony NEX-7, A77, and NEX-6.

It gets super-strange near the bottom of the list, where we find the awful Pentax Q cameras in similar standing as the Fuji X-E1, and the X Pro 1 is in last place. Last place?! The X Pro 1 had a lot of problems, some of which significant, but in no fucking universe is it in last place!

The SLR category isn't any less strange. The Canon 60D is in first place, followed by... the Olympus E-5. I have a hard time forming coherent sentences to describe my reaction to this.

The advanced point-&-shoot category has its fair share of bizarreness. Considering that the Panasonic FZ200 is the top camera, you would assume that this category only includes cameras with small sensors. You would be wrong! Drop down the list and you will find both the Sony RX100 and the Fuji X100. Two seminal cameras... squarely in the middle of the pack.

This absolutely does not affect my views of their other reviews. There are few magazines whose viewpoints I so rarely take with a grain of salt. This camera comparison, though, is so out in left field as to defy analysis or description.

Ignore it.