M240 or 6D (interesting post on Diglloyd)

[rayyan]

Diglloyd is just expressing his opinions and impressions.

Just as posters on this forum do. One does not have to read them let alone subscribe to anyone's site. But being uncivil in one's disagreement is something I would not condone. This again is just my opinion.

What if he compared two different cameras. It happens here all the time.
A D800/D800 E was the hen's teeth...comparing it with a MF.

I am sure more people read what Rockwell or Chambers writes than most of us here. And they get paid for it too!

Good money generating operation they have going, irrespective what the photographic elite here thinks.

 

[Paratom]

Diglloyd is just expressing his opinions and impressions.

Just as posters on this forum do. One does not have to read them let alone subscribe to anyone's site. But being uncivil in one's disagreement is something I would not condone. This again is just my opinion.

....

I think the difference is that his reviews read like they were scientific based facts, not an opinion. This can be misleading.

 

[rayyan]

Nobody has forced anyone to contribute or subscribe to any site. Your money, your choice. The man's site, his opinions. Don't like his opinions, tough luck..no sweat of his back.

Just be happy. With your photography and your opinions.

Don't like it don't waste bw giving him more coverage than he might deserve.

He might be much lesser dumb than it would appear, to at least generate this much traffic and comments.

 

[Vivek]

I think the difference is that his reviews read like they were scientific based facts, not an opinion. This can be misleading.

Really? :shocked:

 

[ptomsu]

No matter if one likes Diglloyd or not (I stopped trusting most of his reviews and will not subscribe to any of his offers any longer).

But I still see severe issues with the new M240 coming. And the main issue is that Leica announces something which is still completely immature at the point of announcement, and then it takes another year before the first product hits the market and - I actually do hope it will work better for the M240 - but I doubt and they need another year to stabilize the product.

Biggest issue for me is the steep price to be paid and then testing around for another year (at least) to have a product which works up to spec's.

And in that regards his conclusion with 6D and whatever high quality lens (or even other vendors camera like D600,.....) cannot be really called to be too wrong.

Still I do hope the best for the M240 when it hits the market.

 

[glenerrolrd]

Just as an example: I could never duplicate the AF-problems he described to have with the S2.
When I e-mailed him about it he seemed not much interested to find out if anything had changed after his test of this particular S2.

If it happens 2-3 times that someone writes 10 pages about a prodcuct but some of his main findings are totally different from what you, as a user of the same product find out - than one looses trust in the methology of a reviewer.

Agree ..I have emailed him as well. His point on the S2 was valid . It will focus on the highest contrast subject thats placed inside the AF circle . If you have the right test subject you can replicate it easily . (It was common knowledge to the guy s at Dale Photo and I replicated with 3 different S2 s ). It was very easy to replicate on the Golden Gate bridge where he tested the S2 .

This is a good example of "learnings " as once I realized the issue ..I just adjusted my placement of the AF circle . To my knowledge this is a function of only having a large AF point (no spot AF) and can t be corrected . The system is very precise but prone to operator error in certain situations. Personally I adjust the AF with a quick MF to verify when I encounter fine detail with a high contrast background .

Leica just doesn t support testing by anyone (to my knowledge ) . Early reviews are many times critical of things that ultimately get resolved with firmware and updates to raw conversions . DL gets his test equipment from BH .

Its pretty obvious that DL subjective conclusions are inflammatory (irritating) ..but his detail testing is as good as I ve found anyplace . (and a whole lot more fact based ).

Please recognize that I am not supporting DL conclusions ....but pointing out that if you want detail short of testing your own equipment ....he brings a lot of value .

 

[glenerrolrd]

I am at a loss to understand the patience of some of the folks who pay to read such crap.

Ken Rockwell, at least, is open about what he spews out and everything he spews is visible to one and all.

I am at a complete loss to understand why you continue to post such insulting comments .

I really enjoy the arrogance of those posting that always fall back on...."only when I personally test the new gear will i know" . Seems like a restatement of the obvious . Only when you use the gear in situations that are important to your photography will you know for sure .

Check the buy sell for the number of "mistakes" ? Personally I don t enjoy visiting the post office to send stuff back or using ebay to sell stuff I should not have purchased in the first place .

 

[Vivek]

If that is insulting to you I will gladly apologize. *However*, keep in my mind that your repeated endorsement of the "testing methods" is an insult to many, including me. Also, understand that there is no personal malice intended toward the "reviewer" in question or any of his subscribers. The discussion (from my side) is about this whole fiasco of the "tests" for sale and the free opinions in a blog that I can reject and counter.

 

[algrove]

I think a better test will be (when the M-240 comes out) the M-240 versus the Sony RX-1, as both will be FF, 24MP. I am interested to know how the Leica with a Summicron 35 will test against the Zeiss f2 on the RX-1 even though the Leica costs 3 times the Sony. The big drawback to the Sony in my mind is the fixed lens although for nearly silent street photography (leaf shutter) it can have its place in many a camera bag. LL's Reichmann wrote an interesting piece on it.

It will be inevitable that this test will be much sought after mostly by photographers and Sony alike. Although comparing a $3k Sony against a $10k Leica setup seems unfair, in my mind, it can only be a winner for Sony to have the luxury of being compared to a Leica.

Personally I can no longer ignore Sony product in view of this latest addition to their line up. Being a new 5D3 user I must say its AF is a delight to use and I keep asking myself why did I not add an AF camera to my lineup earlier, even though my MF P45+ V mount is way ahead of anything else I have for landscape use.

As for DL, I thought his rant about the MM was over the top and did not renew after that as I'd rather put the $50 toward a flash card which has more lasting value to me than reading 12 months of possible rants. His site offers a very thorough list of equipment. While getting into the M9 and digital cameras I found his knowledge base worthwhile for me as to lens selection.

In the back of my mind I seem to feel DL has something against Leica because its Leica. He most always seems to come up something wrong with whatever Leica he is "testing". I guess if I were riding a bike up in the Bristlecone forest I would need an AF to "assist" me in nailed focus photography. Although since being there in late 2012, I found the altitude invigorating and could nail my M9 and MM focus points just fine even though I live at 18 feet above sea level.

 

[fotografz]

What is all the hub-bub about?

We are all free to peruse any review of any camera we want, multi reviews if we wish ... paid or not. Isn't the primary purpose to just get an indication of possible strengths and weakness (which all cameras have) so we know what to look for going in?

I waited over a year to get a S2P. I tested the camera in person, read various reviews and comparative tests prior to buying ... including LLoyd's (which was worth the money for such an expansive purchase, (but a subscription I didn't renew) ... plus followed Leica's propaganda, watched the IQ of early adopters as they posted images, and even the side-by-side Guy and Jack did here on the forum.

Collectively, it just gave me a heads up on stuff to watch for when shooting the subjects I shoot, the way I shoot them. I didn't set out to replicate some flaw like the S2 AF, I just shot normally and watched if it happened to me (it didn't, and in 2+ years still has never happened).

Also doesn't mean a review will catch everything, even BIG GLARING issues like M8 magenta blacks, which I saw in the first ten minutes of shooting and then reported on the LUF.

Buyer Beware.

-Marc

 

[Shashin]

Lloyd is entitled to his choice--it is not like he said to get a cell phone. The SLR is a very good camera type. He is also just giving his opinion to a person looking for some guidance--he does not have to take the advice either. In some sense, the choice is very practical and the person probably is not a professional nor has very much experience. I find experienced photographers never ask others what cameras they should buy. Baring my first "real" camera in 1980, a Nikon FM, I have always done the choosing myself.

Why do we take it so personally if someone prefers a different camera than we do?

What I find interesting is the new Leica 50mm $7000 f/2 lens is a must have. I did not realize the other 50mm lenses by the red dot company were that poor.

 

[iiiNelson]

Why do we take it so personally if someone prefers a different camera than we do?

I don't think people are taking his opinion personally as they are disagreeing with his blanket statement about certain products that he personally found didn't work for him.

It's kind of like where people spread around (erroneously) that the Pentax 645D isn't up to the same standards as other MF cameras and I've seen plenty amazing images from the 645D. It didn't work for some or they preferred to go with a mainstream MF brand like Hasselblad, Phase One, Leica, etc. but continuously make comments about how bad the Pentax was because they didn't like it.

I think after a while people spreading bad information or a camera developing an unwarranted bad reputation just bothers some people more than others. I can understand that from the point of view that it potentially enhances a mob mentality towards a particular brand that isn't helpful to a neutral amateur or a person just looking for objective advice on a particular product. Case in point I steered a friend of mind away from an M9 and toward a D600 for their first digital camera. Not because I don't love my M9 (I truly feel its the best camera available for me) but because of what their needs were (all around camera for travel, macro, zoom lenses, lowlight ability, FF, wide angle shots at time and not too large.) I think DL tried to do this same thing but with additional commentary that wasn't needed or pertinent to truly helping the person asking the question.

 

[glenerrolrd]

If that is insulting to you I will gladly apologize. *However*, keep in my mind that your repeated endorsement of the "testing methods" is an insult to many, including me. Also, understand that there is no personal malice intended toward the "reviewer" in question or any of his subscribers. The discussion (from my side) is about this whole fiasco of the "tests" for sale and the free opinions in a blog that I can reject and counter.

We agree on the subject . Not sure how supporting a different view is insulting . Agree we should stay polite ..my apology. :chug:

 

[monza]

Just confirms my opinion of this bloke - He is aiming to outdo Ken Rockwell - and succeeding. :ROTFL:

All these threads do is send more traffic their way. This is the established Ken Rockwell business plan...stir up controversy and get traffic. Perhaps DL is using the same strategy.It's certainly worked for KR.

 

[ShooterSteve]

Marc, I shared precisely these sentiments when I read his review of the M9. He kept banging on about needing live view for critical focus on images where he could clearly use hyper focal. People like him are dangerous with a bit of knowledge.

I have found many so-called experts that have no experience with manual focus cameras, just don't understand how to use them. As a result they are unqualified in making comparisons let alone recommendations. I'm not saying he's not a good source of information on new cameras - just not always as objective as he should be when it comes to more seasoned professional techniques on the high end of what we do.

 

[Paratom]

What is all the hub-bub about?

We are all free to peruse any review of any camera we want, multi reviews if we wish ... paid or not. Isn't the primary purpose to just get an indication of possible strengths and weakness (which all cameras have) so we know what to look for going in?

I waited over a year to get a S2P. I tested the camera in person, read various reviews and comparative tests prior to buying ... including LLoyd's (which was worth the money for such an expansive purchase, (but a subscription I didn't renew) ... plus followed Leica's propaganda, watched the IQ of early adopters as they posted images, and even the side-by-side Guy and Jack did here on the forum.

Collectively, it just gave me a heads up on stuff to watch for when shooting the subjects I shoot, the way I shoot them. I didn't set out to replicate some flaw like the S2 AF, I just shot normally and watched if it happened to me (it didn't, and in 2+ years still has never happened).

Also doesn't mean a review will catch everything, even BIG GLARING issues like M8 magenta blacks, which I saw in the first ten minutes of shooting and then reported on the LUF.

Buyer Beware.

-Marc

I didnt mean that I have any problem with such kind of reviews, I only think it can be misleading. Sometimes it sounds like a product is flawed, but maybe it is not.
In my case after reading the review about the S2 I expected a flawed AF, when I got a test S2 for a weekend later I was soo surprized how precise the AF worked. I dont even doubt that it is possible to replicate the problem. I wont spend my time with replicating problems though.
What I was trying to say ... I personally dont give much on such reviews any more. I am much more interested to read posts how good a certain products works for people in real life, even better talk to people who use a product a lot, and then try myself. I admit I still do read some of the reviews, and enjoy reading.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

What is all the hub-bub about?

We are all free to peruse any review of any camera we want, multi reviews if we wish ... paid or not. Isn't the primary purpose to just get an indication of possible strengths and weakness (which all cameras have) so we know what to look for going in?

I waited over a year to get a S2P. I tested the camera in person, read various reviews and comparative tests prior to buying ... including LLoyd's (which was worth the money for such an expansive purchase, (but a subscription I didn't renew) ... plus followed Leica's propaganda, watched the IQ of early adopters as they posted images, and even the side-by-side Guy and Jack did here on the forum.

Collectively, it just gave me a heads up on stuff to watch for when shooting the subjects I shoot, the way I shoot them. I didn't set out to replicate some flaw like the S2 AF, I just shot normally and watched if it happened to me (it didn't, and in 2+ years still has never happened).

Also doesn't mean a review will catch everything, even BIG GLARING issues like M8 magenta blacks, which I saw in the first ten minutes of shooting and then reported on the LUF.

Buyer Beware.

-Marc

I always say look at all the reviews. Learn something from them and try it if you can. Than at least you have done the homework and make a call.

 

[iiiNelson]

I always say look at all the reviews. Learn something from them and try it if you can. Than at least you have done the homework and make a call.

I agree and I do the same but many don't. On one hand there are the compulsive buyers and on the other hand there are those who are somewhat ignorant - not entirely of their own discourse but simply by listening to an expert who sounds like they know what they're talking about or at least knows more than they do.

This happens in all aspects of life and in every profession sadly.

 

[MirekE]

When he first started 3-4 years ago, he was quite objective. I even paid for a 1 year subscription. But I think he recently lost his marbles

I paid for the Guide to Zeiss several years ago and I am a subscriber of the the Guide to Leica right now.
I would like to see more updates and hands on tests in the area I am paying for, but I found the lens reviews thorough and very helpful. The information on particular lenses (those he actually tested) is more complete and less biased than what I was able to find on the free internet (forums, blogs, etc.). The value for me is in the hands on tests and comparisons and their demonstrated results. The opinions about future cameras - sometimes I agree (likely more often than most rangefinder photography veterans), sometimes I don't.

 

[fotografz]

I didnt mean that I have any problem with such kind of reviews, I only think it can be misleading. Sometimes it sounds like a product is flawed, but maybe it is not.
In my case after reading the review about the S2 I expected a flawed AF, when I got a test S2 for a weekend later I was soo surprized how precise the AF worked. I dont even doubt that it is possible to replicate the problem. I wont spend my time with replicating problems though.
What I was trying to say ... I personally dont give much on such reviews any more. I am much more interested to read posts how good a certain products works for people in real life, even better talk to people who use a product a lot, and then try myself. I admit I still do read some of the reviews, and enjoy reading.

What that speaks to is that the responsibility is really on the shoulders of the reader/potential buyer ... these reviewers are human, and their particular take on something may have little to no bearing on a reader's needs ... no matter how detailed and objective a review may seem.

The obsession with perfection in an imperfect world seems to be approacing a mental illness in digital photography . The flaws are there, and someone will find them ... because there is ALWAYS something. The problem arises when people obsess on the flaws to the exclusion of the merits as applied to their needs. For some, it is almost as if what others think is more important than what they think.

Seeing is believing isn't as valid as it once was ... using and seeing is believing.

-Marc