This book sets out to present one photo from 500 different photographers. Although this sounds good in theory, the end result is only a middling experience.
Since all the artists are listed alphabetically, the result is an eclectic and chaotic mixture of photos. This would have been a much better book, had the same contents been arranged chronologically or at least thematically. As it stands though, the photos jump all over the place in time and subject and this greatly hampers one's enjoyment of the book. It also seemed unfair to have some amazing, iconic photographers reduced to just one photo, which is hardly representative of their contribution to the field, whereas others could easily have been left out of the book altogether.
The print quality ranges from OK to below average. The quality may have been the norm 15 years ago when this book was printed (my copy is the older large format coffee table version, not the more recent pocket size edition), but recent advances in print quality leave this book pretty much in the dust. Even though photos shot on large glass plates still display an impressive level of detail, I've seen many of the photos in better quality in other photo books. Disappointingly, a few of the photos even appear to have been scanned from magazine or newspaper resources, displaying a tell-tale sign of moire patterns. Luckily, there are not many such examples but they still leave a bit of a bad aftertaste.
Although the book features a lot of famous photographers, not all photos are necessarily taken by photographers. For example the man on the moon photo by Neil Armstrong is iconic, but Neil himself is not really known for his photography or the photo by Lewis Carroll of his "Alice" is of certainly of interest, though Carroll himself is better remembered for his books. Some photos are by photographers, who were otherwise inconsequential, but are known by their one single iconic photo (for example the hoisting of the red flag on top of the Reichstag in 1945). Yet some other photographers, with an otherwise impressive body of work, are not represented by their most famous photo at all (like Steve McCurry not being represented by his haunting green-eyed "Afghan Girl" but by a much less know picture).
As for the captions, this is another one of those photo books, where the editor is trying to guess the story behind the photo by making all sorts of assumptions, either because the facts are either not available at all (as with older photos) or they are just not available to the editor. I must say I am highly sceptical of all sorts of artistic interpretations and unless you have the facts, I'd rather draw my own conclusions. Luckily not all captions are just conjectures of the editors and some photos have true backstories related by the photographers themselves, but those that don't, soon become a tiresome read.
On a more positive note, the selection of photos, though chaotic, is varied and there are some excellent photos throughout the book. Not only are all the big names are here, but you will most likely also be introduced to many photographers, whose work you may want to get to know better. For example I found some fashion, portrait, nude and photojournalism photographers, whose books I will certainly research online. Apart from genre specific favourites, of the biggest interest to me personally were also the historical photos done around the 1850s-1890s. Unlike the photos of Leibowitz, Newton or Capa, which feature in almost every "best of" photo book, these historical photos I had not seen before. I always feel mesmerized by being able to see the fine details of buildings, people and life from more than 150 years ago because common sense usually tells us that there should be almost no photographic records from that era.
With such a vast range of genres covered, you may find that your favourite genres are either under-represented or there are too many examples from genres you don't care about. For example I found myself skipping all the abstract and artsy and many of the staged photos. I do realize though that it would be impossible to please everyone in a "best of" book and so both the editors and the readers will have to make compromises.
In conclusion, with either a chronological or thematical arrangement, this would have made an almost excellent photo book. Unfortunately the photos are arranged alphabetically by photographers, which provides for a very chaotic reading experience. If you take it as a coffee book only to browse here and there, this book is pretty good. If however you want to read it cover to cover, I'd say the book is simply ok. For a much better selection of portrait and photojournalism photos, I recommend any of the LIFE anniversary books, but especially "The Great Life Photographers".