A couple of things I noted about the review which seem contrary to all other opinions were:
- Slight disappointment with the sensor performance: To be fair a lot of the early posts on CR were of the same view, some commentators (e.g. Scott Kelby) raved about it, most have now accepted its better than the pervious generation but not as good as perhaps they had wished or indeed the competition. However, the strange thing with this review is the implication that its worse than the 70D, which is the first review stating this, but also perhaps this is caused by the fact he is reliant on in Camera JPEG processing!
- AF system inaccurate: This is really strange, he states "I was disappointed with the high number of out of focus shots I got for such a slow moving activity " and also implies disappointment in focus accuracy, this is strange as virtually all other reviews have held this out as a strong point of the camera. One has to ask why, when others were absolutely raving about its performance and comparing with canons top of the line cameras/ For me this is a more important comment if I were buying - is there some merit in what he says and if so why does everyone else have contrary results here!
At the end of the day its an opinion, but remember he is a blogger and wants to drive traffic to his site as he can then get some $$$ for click trough's, controversial blogs do this - after would we have bothered reading it if it had been broadly neutral?