Hey G1 fans.

[iiiNelson]

I agree that I didn't think of it or see it as Reid Bashing. It's more constructive criticism than anything. Everyone gave their opinion in an intelligent manner from their own personal experiences. They also offered "suggestions" for improvements to be made. It's kind of hard to call that bashing IMO.
If they reviews are valuable to you then there's no reason to not continue your subscription but if you find yourself not utilizing the information on a regular basis then I can see how people feel it's a waste of money to them. He seems like a knowledgable person from his posts on forums I read. That said there are obviously more than one source of valuable opinions around on the internet.

 

[monza]

I think you have misinterpreted 'cannot recommend'.

I'd have thought that Sean's campaigning, reviews, and extensive contributions to discussions [particularly on LUF] on using various 'M' and LTM lenses on the M8 demonstrate emphatically his position in favour of coding lenses when appropriate.

I read 'cannot recommend' as will not, a legal nicety which protects him from possible and no doubt unwelcome litigation by people who code lenses, run into problems, and seek compensation from Sean.

Whilst Sean cannot recommend, the signposts in his writing clearly shows where coding is advisable.

You are probably correct, although I 'cannot imagine' anyone litigating because they incorrectly coded a lens based on something Sean wrote. Since I'm no longer a subscriber, I'm working from memory, but I don't recall him explaining how to code, or what the codes are, how-tos, etc.

In any event, I wish he'd go to a system that doesn't use flash.

 

[Amin]

We've had a fairly long thread now discussing an article that can't be read without a paid subscription -- "second-party spam," in effect... after a while I decided that his opinions weren't really any more valuable than a lot of other opinions available on the Web for free... But this still smells a little like plugola to me.

I think it's important to realize that almost no sites are free. Sean has a GRD II review which you can read if you pay a subscription. I wrote a review of the same camera for my blog, which you can read if you view the ads. Someone might post a review of the same camera in these forums, which in part serve as marketing for Guy and Jack's workshops (it's right up there in the banner logo, see it?). None of this is exactly free.

If someone starts a thread about a DPReview review, you can't go look at it without paying DPR in the form of ad views. Is that thread then "plugola"? I think Sean and Lloyd take a lot of criticism because they choose an uncommon form of payment. Yet, the subscription method of payment does help them eliminate certain forms of bias which can be introduced by advertisers.

...For example, take a site like Diglloyd's (http://www.diglloyd.com/diglloyd/blog.html):... he has several helpful "free" articles available; if you like what you see in the free areas, then it's a pretty good bet you'll like the information in the paid section.

On Sean's site, I don't recall much in the way of free meat. (Is there any at all now? Been over a year since I looked...)...

Sean has 7 articles written for The Luminous Landscape which are listed and linked under "Example Articles" if you visit Reid Reviews. From what I recall, these articles have been there for a long time now.


I only recently subscribed to both Diglloyd DAP/Zeiss ZF and Reid Reviews. Both are excellent and worth the money to me, but I can see how they might not be to someone else. I wish Sean's rangefinder tests were done on film cameras, since crop results on an M8 don't apply as well to me. I wish his site didn't rely on Flash, which is a pain in the neck.

However, as someone who does camera tests, I admire Sean's approach and methods. His reviews are much more helpful to me than the ones I find on the big sites like DPReview, Imaging Resource, and DCRP. Likewise for Diglloyd. In contrast, the great majority of tests which we find in forums (not just these but any forums) are not done with the same level of care and expertise. My two cents.

 

[monza]

Well said, Amin.

Good points about the reviews. DPreview provides a great amount of minutia in their camera reviews, but I find myself skipping over nearly all of it. Later, if I want to find how how much a camera weighs or some other obscure bit of info, it's very handy to use it as a reference. Reid Reviews approaches things from a different perspective and that approach is more helpful to me, in addition, there is a consistency across different tests such as lens testing. Unfortunately the flash interface gets in the way of easily bringing up a previous test to compare it to another one. I was not familiar with Diglloyd until this thread (thanks for the link, Jack.)

Lastly, good point about nothing being free.

 

[Ranger 9]

I think it's important to realize that almost no sites are free...I wrote a review of the same camera for my blog, which you can read if you view the ads...None of this is exactly free...If someone starts a thread about a DPReview review, you can't go look at it without paying DPR in the form of ad views...

Yeah, but my landlord won't let me pay the rent in "ad views" -- he expects me to write out a check. Same at the gas station, the grocery store, etc. -- for some narrow-minded reason, they won't accept "ad views" either. They're tediously insistent on receiving some form of legal tender, which for me is a finite resource, whereas my ability to deliver "ad views" is limited only by my patience.

To me, this makes the argument that "ad views" and paid subscriptions are equivalent seem like nothing more than an elegant sophistry.

But that's just how it looks from my position fairly well down the economic ladder. If all you prosperous gents want to take the position that, "Pish-tosh, my good man, it's only money," that's fine too. At least I know where I am now, and where that is is outta here...

 

[monza]

The argument is not that they are equivalent.

Politicians have us clamor for 'free universal healthcare' as well.

Free roads, free public education, free public television, NPR, PBS, free over-the-air TV...none of it is free.

 

[Terry]

Well said, Amin.

Good points about the reviews. DPreview provides a great amount of minutia in their camera reviews, but I find myself skipping over nearly all of it. Later, if I want to find how how much a camera weighs or some other obscure bit of info, it's very handy to use it as a reference. Reid Reviews approaches things from a different perspective and that approach is more helpful to me, in addition, there is a consistency across different tests such as lens testing. Unfortunately the flash interface gets in the way of easily bringing up a previous test to compare it to another one. I was not familiar with Diglloyd until this thread (thanks for the link, Jack.)

Lastly, good point about nothing being free.

I find with DPReview while there may be a lot of detail if you actually own the camera it can be a great resource. On cameras I've bought that they've reviewed the operation and controls sections where they demonstrate or talk about the operation of the camera you learn things that you don't get from the manual.

 

[TRSmith]

Actually, I don't mind paying for value. And as I said initially, Sean does deliver. (Digilloyd too!) But as soon as I take the step of paying, the relationship has changed and I go from being a "visitor" to a "customer". As a customer, I'm willing to accept the self-service nature of the web delivery method. But I also expect a certain amount of customer service in return.

The few posters in this thread are not the first or the only people to complain about the interface. After the quaintness wears off, and you've extracted the most pertinent information required for an imminent purchase, the reluctance to make any effort to enhance the clunky "delivery" method starts to feel uncomfortable. Arrogant even.

It sounds corny, but once someone starts paying you with cash for your service, they're your customer. And as the saying goes (like it or not) the customer is always right. Ignore them and they go away.

 

[peterb]

First off, it's always amazing to me how a thread starts out one way and then takes on a life of it's own. Absolutely wonderful example of discourse (even if heated) at its best.

Amin,

Excellent points. And thanks for bringing digilloyd to my attention (I think others may have mentioned it too but this time I took notice and clicked).

That said. What's the big deal here? You have pay as you pick up magazines like Pop Photo or Chausser (I think that's the one) and scores of others I see at Borders and Barnes and Noble, loaded with ads and articles to read and highly opinionated reviews to get insights about various cameras.

You pay nothing for sites like DPreview, Luminous Landscape and Ken Rockwell (who does a great job on Nikon gear).

You can also go to scores of other sites like Camera Labs (which even has some videos of their reviews posted on youtube!), Digital Camera Info, Shutterbug (which is also a magazine you buy), Imaging Resource and scores of others. All filled with highly subjective, highly opinionated stuff we eagerly inhale so we can start forming a short list of possible candidates for gear or whatever. Again, all FREE. (The most powerful word in advertising, by the way. )

If someone wants to charge you for their insights and approaches, let 'em. It's a free society. You're can either choose to pay. Or not. In Sean's case, as Amin mentioned, there are a number of 'sample' articles to get a sense of his approach that you DON'T have to pay for. And I assume if you like what you read then you'll go check it out to see if a subscription is going to be worth something for a year. (Please note his annual subscription is the same as most monthly porn sites. So let's get real about how much he's charging here.) Yeah I said at the outset his site is worth subscribing to. But that's my opinion and was merely sharing it with you as an photo enthusiast like everyone else here. And you can either go "Lemme check it out." Or, "Peter's full of crap! No way I'm gonna pay for the opinion of a some photo dude I don't know." Again, it's your choice.

Like Terry I tend to agree that DPreview while it goes on a bit long if you own the camera it can be a great resource. But if I'm interested in the camera I don't have I will skip down past the initial stuff to see what their comparisons with other similar make models have unearthed and of course get to the conclusion and see sample shots of the same London landmarks from review to review (like Steve's Digicams of his Florida playground, desk kitsch and salt water kayaks.)

For the most part I use these varied resources and cross reference them to make comparison notes like I did with the G1 on Pop Photo. There I may unearth some unusual information (assuming all measurements are equal as in the case of Pop Photo's G1 review when I was curious about what they measured with other cameras). I don't do it with every camera just the one or two I may be interested in purchasing (my short list if you will) like I was with the G1.

On the one hand I am interested in how a camera's measured performance is. Things measured by the independent observers like resolution, color accuracy, noise expecations at various ISOs and so on. DPreview and Digital Camera Info are particularly good in that regard. Again with a little cross referencing you can determine a lot.

But I'm also interested in what people who've used the camera have to say about it in terms of their experience. Is it too heavy. Is it fast enough? And the proverbial bottom line, how are the images? (Words and expressions like "jaw dropping" usually get my attention.) Often they provide not only subjective views but also put forth things they think about as photographers and why or why not a particular camera or lens meets that expectation. (Like if they're really into a camera that can fire off 8 shots in a row in RAW without pausing when I am a more deliberate see and shoot kinda guy who's own shooting experience never calls for that and feels that even at 3.5 fps I'm way ahead of what I was capable of with an M6, I'm not gonna hold it against the G1.) In short you glean their biases from their own prose just like you'd get an 'author's' message from a novel. This I use to decide the validity of their claims in terms of my own personal biases.

I like Sean and there are things I like about what he says but there are others I take with a grain of salt because through his writings I've gotten to know where he stands on things. He's for the most part impartial but he like everyone here has certain biases and those I take into account as I read what he has experienced vs others.

Like the cameras I prefer I like to make the decisions not someone (or something) else.

Peter

 

[monza]

That's the beauty of the free market: one can choose the advertising-supported sites, or the subscriber-supported sites. Both can be successful if they provide services that customers want.

 

[barjohn]

I asked Sean about the use of Flash. He uses it as a means of securing the content of his site. Of Course one can easily take a snapshot of any web page or portion thereof so it really only protects the content from easily being converted to text form. Personally, I don't think it is worth it to lose customers over this minimal kind of protection but Sean may see it differently. In any case he doesn't believe it is costing him customers since subscriptions are up.

 

[woodyspedden]

Well, just for contrarianism, I am a big fan of Sean Reid and his site. At $32 per year, you have access to much information of value. Is everything Sean says is "right"? Hardly. However he has a methodology for testing that if nothing else is consistent. From one camera to another or one lens to another the methodology is the same and as such makes comparisons possible.

With that said, Sean's biases are his. Period!! Everyone has biases and his are there and well known. The beauty of this is that once you are calibrated to Sean's biases (which he freely admits) you can dial in your own factors as to how to relate and thus gain value from the review(s). He clearly favors DRF over DSLR and once known that tells you how he personally values various factors of each system.

I disagree strongly as to his tendency to be pedantic. He values what he values and thus defends his choices of lenses and systems based on those values. No different than LL with Michael's biases. Both value real world images for evaluating lenses and systems rather than on more mechanical approaches a la Erwin Puts. I am not putting down Erwin either. If you get more from his approach, then value it more than others.

I love this site and have been a workshop member and follower since the beginning. But i do not believe that random thoughts, experiences etc about cameras, lenses etc are in any way comparable to a well documented, well thought out review. We, as camera purchasers, end up with biases that color what we write and obviously then bias other potential purchasers. By the way, this certainly includes what I buy, write about and then, as many, if not most, of the contributors to this site do and then sell the products they buy for the next most appealing product. Nothing wrong with this so i am not wacking on anyone, but folks who are very susceptible to the opinions expressed may end up with products they bought on recommendation if not outright enthusiam by reviewers who then move on in a heartbeat. So as many have said, do your own diligence, including the expressed opinions on this site, and then make your own decisions after handling the products to see if they do what YOU want and need. Anything else is foolhardy.

Just my humble opinion in hopes that it helps someone along the way

Best

Woody

 

[Terry]

Hey Woody - did your G1 arrive?

 

[barjohn]

Sean, felt that I had not fully expressed his views so with his permission I am quoting verbatim from his emails so that his full opinion will be expressed and not just what I thought was important.

-----------------------------
On Jan 11, 2009, at 1:06 PM, John Griffith wrote:

Sean,
There is a discussion in the GetDPI forum thread titled "Hey G1 Fans" in which your and other paid sites is being debated. The biggest complaint about your site is the use of Flash as the delivery/user interface vehicle. I have to admit that I don't care for it either. It occurred to me that I have never heard your reasoning and that in fairness to you we should hear your side of the story. The other thought I had was maybe you weren't aware that you were losing some subscribers because of that interface and that if you knew you might consider changing to a more user friendly interface. I would certainly like to hear your views on the subject.

John

John Griffith
[email protected]



Hi John,

Thanks. I don't participate on that site but I am aware of the discussion as I've gotten several e-mails. It's in Flash for content security - not perfect security but better than html. I have a site developer and if we find a web medium that works better - yet is at least as secure, I'll look at it. I talk about the site format in the subscription instructions so that people can know the details ahead of time.

Meanwhile, I'm up to my ears in prepping content which is always the heart of the site to me.

Cheers,

Sean

BTW, despite the pros and cons of Flash the site's renewal rate has been quite good since it started. The interface isn't perfect but its not awful either and I personally like the complete lack of ads. Adding a search feature would be great and a linkable table of contents is in the works.

Cheers,

Sean

Hi John,

I just saw your post. Flash may be a problem for some but my point, overall, was that most people seem to get to the content pretty well. I also mentioned that I would consider other web mediums as well (if they provided security) but you didn't mention that in your post. I also said that most of my energy right now is going into the content of the site.

It's interesting how things get filtered and translated.

Cheers,

Sean

BTW, though, thanks for the comments on my photography.

Cheers,

Sean

Sorry, I should have copied and pasted your post. I didn't mean to leave out your other comment but since it seemed tenuous I did not want to give the impression you were about to change either. I did some experimenting with your site and what I find is that on Safari it is very slow and does not scroll easily from the mouse. On Windows with IE or Firefox it isn't so slow. Since many photographers use Macs and Safari you might want to test and compare using both IE and Safari. Apparently Adobe did not build the same performance into each Flash plug-in. If you like I will correct the post since I don't mean to give the wrong impression for you.

John

Hi John,

That would be great, thank you. As I said, I am interested in looking at other ways of presenting the site but more pressing to me is the need to finish up the many reviews and articles that are already in progress. I'm swimming in Zeiss lenses for example. Given the choice of halting new content to focus on the site format vs. finishing these articles, I favor the latter.

The slowness of the site, to whatever degree it is there, largely has to do with the fact that the pictures are compressed at level 9. That's not usual but it is done for good reason. I view the site primarily using Safari on a Mac Pro and it doesn't seem that slow to me over DSL.

The format of the site is important but I also think there's a danger of people fixating on that and overlooking the heart of the site which is the content. The approach, the essays, they're what I care most about.

Cheers,

Sean

------------------------

This should clarify any confusion I might have caused.

 

[Brian Mosley]

I am a great believer of recommending stuff that works for me to my friends... it's a major reason I frequent the forums, to listen to the advice, warnings and recommendations of my peers - and to offer what I can of my own experience in return.

This is all free information - and has zero guarantee of accuracy - opinions, as they say differ.

When it comes to more formal, well disciplined and structured reviews I look to the big commercial sites like dpreview - but there's always a niggling doubt about commercial drivers affecting the reviewers' weighting...

With Sean's reviews, I just feel that I'm paying for Sean's time in producing the material there - it's all up front and any bias is simply a reflection of his experience as a photographer.

This is a complicated space, and there is no such thing as a free lunch... someone somewhere has to pay for the material - I like Sean's model, and it looks like more and more people agree it's worth the repeat subscription.

Kind Regards

Brian

 

[peterb]

Woody, John...nicely put.

John, thanks sharing your exchange with Sean.

Peter

 

[woodyspedden]

Hey Woody - did your G1 arrive?

Not yet Terry but I am anxiously awaiting. If it is what I hope (and what many of you have shown here) I will probably sell one of my M8's and use the G1 as my M spare. (Alongside the M7 with film)

Woody

 

[lmr]

Two personal Observation on the G1.

1) Looks like G1 hit a "Home Run"
2) Looks like G1 is fast becoming the "M Spare"/"M8 Backup"

I am still enjoying with my G1, waiting for my 4/3 to m4/3 adapter, 45-200mmm lens. and M adapter. With my G1, I can use all my M, LTM, R and 4/3 and m4/3 lens. This is just amazing. I never had a camera that can do that. With the prices falling, I may even get a Backup G1. Wonder if they sell only the body.

Robert.

 

[jonoslack]

Not yet Terry but I am anxiously awaiting. If it is what I hope (and what many of you have shown here) I will probably sell one of my M8's and use the G1 as my M spare. (Alongside the M7 with film)

Woody

:ROTFL: In your dreams Woody.
The G1 is a wonderful step forward, and it shows real prospects for the future, but the idea that it's an M8 substitute is (IMHO of course) one step too far.

Granted, it's easier to focus M lenses accurately on the G1 in good light . . . .but then, was that a problem? As for the image quality, compared to compact cameras (like the D-lux4, ricoh GRDII etc) the G1 is stellar - wonderful - spectacular . . . compared to an M8 file it's simply 'okay'.

The EVF is really good, so much better than any other one I've seen, but there is the problem that by the time you've seen something . . . it's finished. Catching fleeting expressions in people is simply a non-starter.

Right - Grumpy Old Man Mode off.

Just don't be too quick to sell that M8!

 

[wblynch]

I like this thread. It's shown me there's a site I never heard of before.

AND it's shown me that I don't need, nor care, to go there.

To GetDPI I say thanks, you've saved me tremendous time and energy that I have so little to spare in the first place. I certainly can't waste it on arrogance.

I enjoy what I've read and learned here. The community is great and I also learned I have to start clicking on more ads !!

Take care all, Spring is soon arriving.

-Bill Lynch, Mission Viejo, Ca

=======

... I don't see any ads. I have no blockers; am I doing something wrong???