Got my copy of ST through today. I generally rarely read it. However there is an article on NV which made it seem quite interesting.
What a load of crap!! I have written to em
I noted with interest your article in the Lamping section and entitled “Right for the Night”. Fox shooting is my passion so I really looked forward to reading the article. What a disappointment!!
It is without question one of the worst pieces of review journalism I have ever read. You have allowed the author to belittle/criticise 2 pieces of equipment (Pulsar and Nightsight) whilst making ABSOLUTELY NO QUANTIFIABLE claims for the equipment he is reviewing.
He claims to have watched “rabbits feeding in acute detail” well before they were in range. Of What?? A catapult or centrefire rifle?? What distance? He claims to have watched foxes “fields away”, are we talking paddocks or 60 acre stubbles?
The picture of the rabbit in the article gives the impression it has been take through the scope of the unit. I am certain it has not.
Such uninformed, shoddy, lazy journalism is hard to excuse and a total waste of space in your magazine and in my time reading it. Worse still it might encourage people with little knowledge or experience to make a purchase of a product which, based on your article, has no stated facts to commend it.
I struggle to find anything worth reading in your magazine these days so to find something that is of interest then being so badly represented is a double blow.