PC World - false advertising?

wealdroam

Dave-o wrote: »

I agree that camera quality cannot entirely be measured by the RRP but would a reasonable consumer not think that a $200 compact is better than a $110 one?

They may well do.

Also, a reasonable consumer might not expect a camera selling for £69.99, your Lumix FS16, to perform as well as one selling for £169.99... e.g.Lumix DMC-TZ19 on PCW.

Crazy_Jamie

Dave-o wrote: »

I agree that camera quality cannot entirely be measured by the RRP but would a reasonable consumer not think that a $200 compact is better than a $110 one?

D

Absolutely, but you didn't buy a £200 camera. You bought a £70 camera. The RRP is set when the camera is released. Depending on when it came out, it would likely be common sense that superior models have been released since. Literally typing the model of your camera into Google brings up numerous links that tell me that it was released about a year ago, is widely available for around the £70-£90 mark, and has received solid mostly reviews within the context of its price range.

You seem to be labouring under the idea that an item's RRP should reflect its quality irrespective of when it is released and what you paid for it. Such a view is incorrect. Literally typing the model of this camera into Google would have shown you exactly what type of camera this is, and if that wasn't what you wanted, you shouldn't have bought it.