The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Smart Photographers with Blogs

Shashin

Well-known member
It is quite simple for me:

DPReview studio test scene
DXO mark scores

People giving opinions and taking nice images is more about the person and their skills. I prefer a more quantitative approach.

On the other side, people talking about specs and simple optical theory are not very enlightening either. Mostly because they don't understand the significance of their numbers. If you have to make two identical images and compare them at 100% to state there is something significant, then you are probably bad at math.

I wish there were reviewers that could take a systemic view of the photographic process including the final destination a image will arrive at--the human observer.

Still, the outcome is always the same: we are just going to buy what we desire.
 

darr

Well-known member
Years ago after entering digital, I read Reid Reviews and Lloyd Chambers for about a year. Some of the info was interesting, but I found it not worth the money. I remember being interested in digital infrared and Chambers advertised he had it for a price. Little did I know he really did not have much info (I could have added chapters to what he had at the time), but I had to pay to find this out. A disappointing waste of time and money. I sent Chambers a question about something else later on down the road and was taken back by his rude response. I decided then I would not financially support that type of business and instead use the money to rent gear.

I agree with others that feel there is nothing like using the gear for yourself. If I feel comfortable with gear, I make pictures, if not, it collects dust. It is that simple. Reading technical data to figure out if the design holds up is good enough for me. I have been at this craft long enough to know what suits me will not suit everyone, so I never buy off of someone else's opinion. Some of my favorite work has been done with cheap gear and some of my biggest financial losses were from buying unnecessary gear. I try to never buy first generation and patiently wait to see how new gear unfolds in the hands and minds of others.

There is so much info out there it is not difficult to find free technical data and hands-on video reviews if I want to indulge. What I do mostly is look at other photographers work. I am on this forum because there are some outstanding photographers posting images here. I appreciate their talent, technical skills, and what info they choose to share. When it is time for me to upgrade my gear, I remember images most and then the gear used to make the images. I am a competent enough photographer to know if someone whose work I admire shot with this camera, or this lens, or that digital back and produced beautiful work, then I know the gear is good enough for me. It's all relative really.

Nothing wrong with paying to read stuff if it satisfies in some way, but those types of gear review sites do not satisfy me enough to pay for it.

Kind regards,
Darr
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
+1 for Roger Cicala. :thumbs:
+2 for Roger Cicala. :thumbs:

I also like Reid Reviews although I personally think that his street shots are, err, disturbingly ordinary (and maybe that's the point).

I can certainly provide a list of BS merchants out there who are just click bait.

I've been a DL subscriber but he seems to want to find fault in gear that I've never ever experienced his faults with myself.
 

JoelM

Well-known member
I like Roger's blogs as well. He is a scientist and subscribes to the scientific method. Most reviewers do not understand that principle. Also, I like Phillip Reeve's site. They use real world images and test things I am interested in. The also check out some older lenses like FD, Olympus OM, Contax MM and MJ, etc. I like the quirky stuff.

Joel
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
+2 for Roger Cicala. :thumbs:

.
Oh, right. Roger Cicala++

He sees multiple copies and can really give QC data. I hate bad QC more than bad optics, because you never know if there might be a better copy out there. And having to return bad lenses so that some less observant person gets stuck with it is just wrong.
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
Thanks to all that contributed .

I certainly agree that any pay site must be very relevant to justify the expenditure . In all likely hood I will not renew DL after I have gone thru his extensive test achieve . As I mentioned I believe his testing has improved significantly from the almost test chart like reviews . I find understanding field curvature ,focus shift and ADC software not so relevant to my gear selections but helps me in my technique .

I am impressed by his insights into AI pixel shift and AI focus stacking capabilities of the S1R .

And YES his email responses tend to impart a certain arrogant edge that drives people away .

Sean Reid is quite different ...only follow him if you are into street shooting and care about gear (pretty narrow focus). His opinions are IMHO almost always dead on ..so I rely on him as an expert more than on his tests. LOL ..I don t find his images compelling as well.

MING is interesting because he is a deep thinker . He tries to make sense out of the larger questions we encounter in photography . He is constantly challenging the importance of having the very best gear . He has what I would call a purpose driven approach .

The point being that each of the blogs mentioned as well as the ones I missed are written by very very smart people . They are all trying to contribute from their individual perspectives on gear . I am not endorsing pay sites in general but recognize if I expect more than a superficial pass at testing ..they can be beneficial . Even sites that are definitely biased can be great sources of information .
 
Top