A word on science...
Many times I read complains here about the lack of scientific rigor of this or that person. Having a PHD in physics doesn't give, that I know, credentials of any means when it comes to photography equipment unless the person is actively working within the industry itself and in a relevant area. Big difference.
The only person that I know in this forum who currently is actively working within this industry is Graeme Nattress from Red cameras and the only truly reliable voice I'd consider scientificaly reliable. And you can actually see the difference in his posts. His written have weight. (maybe there are others but I don't know who). Not the dealers nor the workshopers who's activity is different and can only use a perceptive point of view, and specially not the forum scientists but wich scientific activity has nothing to do with this industry.
So when I read that Mark isn't scientif in his concepts , I'd ad: like everybody else here. Except the very few like Graeme that do not participate in polemics.
Then, I don't know why people are always looking for absolute facts and react as if the content of an article had to be also absolute.
I don't know, but life told me that there is no such thing. It's all relative, it's not black or white but greys.
So people are looking for some truth or absolute and over react when there are things that seem to contradict their ideas of truth when there is no such thing as this. I'm very sorry to tell this, but this is very infantile.
When I read the Mark article, I found nothing that was specialy provocative, nor new, this detail topic and the excelence of MF is an old debate that has been on and on for ages in all possible forms, and this was just another one.
I may or may not share his views, in this case I don't share them completly, but I can't find any content that would deserve such noise and polemic. Mark, IMO, is right, within what matters for him. I don't share his views because what matters for me are different parameters, but I can understand his focus and don't expect him to be rigurously scientific (see the first part above).
It doesn't mean that any article written is the truth or absolute. There is no such thing as that, absolute truth. We can be on disagreement but if because of that it has to lead to personal attacks and disprestige on any person, I think in the end that it doesn't talk too well about us.
Mark is concern about fine detail? Does analogy with wine or whatever? Fine for me. He is right in his perceptions. So as I'm right when I'm saying that for me, MF manufacturers aren't the one who are producing the most exciting equipment today, that they have become boring expensive and outdated and that if they don't understand that this world is now a multimedia world, they will disapear...I'm also right when I point that, for some, multimedia will not resonate with them, my words will sound wrong. For others, content, creativity is their main stream etc...
The fact that such an inocent article generated such a noise all over internet is preocupating. Something's wrong somewhere.
To resume: people IMO should take things a little less seriously and sweep their door floor first before jumping on others like in this thread, whoever the person is.