250swb Posted May 1, 2013 Share #61 Posted May 1, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Why then would anyone care about these reviews? If ‘review’ was even the right word for this. Even when I am reviewing cameras I happen to like I don’t get all excited, or not in public anyway. Which perhaps is why after many years reading LFI, even subscribing for the past four years, I find I have never, ever, read any of the camera and lens reviews. Trying to be 'objective' and adopting a mundane style doesn't get over the fact that by its very presence any review is displayed to advantage in LFI, nothing is contextualised outside of the bubble that is Leica. Indeed the cover says the M is Leica's 'Flagship camera', so it has already been pre-judged as such and hardly needs a 'review'. In fact the 'review' of the M in LFI is simply a long running sales brochure, a never ending description of the M's features. A review anywhere else in the media is an opinion by the reviewer, interspersed with technical specifications. Which is why the aforesaid Jeremy Clarkson is so popular with motorists, he has an opinion. Gone are the days of showing motorists how big the glove box is, he gives the bigger picture. And while Steve Huff may indeed live in his own bubble and favour the camera's he likes (as does LFI), he isn't shy, he is happy to give an opinion, and people value an opinion because opinions always carry with them context. So perhaps you should get excited, because mock objectivism only seeks to pull the wool over peoples eyes. The difference is that if people read a sales brochure they know who published it, but printing what is essentially an extended version using the same words in an 'independent' magazine is deceitful. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 1, 2013 Posted May 1, 2013 Hi 250swb, Take a look here So Huff's sold his 240 then. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
earleygallery Posted May 1, 2013 Share #62 Posted May 1, 2013 And I don't think that Jeremy Clarkson actually owns all the cars he thinks are great. Most reviewers review the camera and hand it back. Why all the fuss?! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted May 1, 2013 Share #63 Posted May 1, 2013 Which perhaps is why after many years reading LFI, even subscribing for the past four years, I find I have never, ever, read any of the camera and lens reviews. Which does not prevent you from having strong opinions about these reviews you don’t read. Well, so be it. When I am writing a review (or whatever) I have a prototypical reader in mind, a reader who would ask certain questions that I am trying to answer. When I am writing for LFI, my image of the prototypical reader is (to a large part) informed by issues raised in this forum. But obviously I cannot please everyone, not at the same time anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tashley Posted May 1, 2013 Share #64 Posted May 1, 2013 Which does not prevent you from having strong opinions about these reviews you don’t read. Well, so be it. When I am writing a review (or whatever) I have a prototypical reader in mind, a reader who would ask certain questions that I am trying to answer. When I am writing for LFI, my image of the prototypical reader is (to a large part) informed by issues raised in this forum. But obviously I cannot please everyone, not at the same time anyway. Amen Brother! It IS possible to be as close to objective as makes no difference: I strive very hard to do that in my reviews, even to the extent of parsing my attitude for signs of some prejudice and making sure that I express preference explicitly. And like you, I write with a prototypical reader in mind but aware that other types exist, too. But as you say, you cannot please everyone all the time... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest borge Posted May 1, 2013 Share #65 Posted May 1, 2013 But as you say, you cannot please everyone all the time... A review isn't supposed to please anyone. The review is about the product and it's qualities (or lack of) and should always be honest based on the users experience with the product. It's impossible to make a 100% objective review as one person. To do that you need a panel of reviewers with different backgrounds, preferences and experience. Reviews are also quite different. A review isn't a review. A review can be a user experience (non-technical - the reviews I personally prefer). And other reviews are very technical and theoretical. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tashley Posted May 1, 2013 Share #66 Posted May 1, 2013 A review isn't supposed to please anyone. The review is about the product and it's qualities (or lack of) and should always be honest based on the users experience with the product. It's impossible to make a 100% objective review as one person. To do that you need a panel of reviewers with different backgrounds, preferences and experience. Reviews are also quite different. A review isn't a review. A review can be a user experience (non-technical - the reviews I personally prefer). And other reviews are very technical and theoretical. I agree that review types vary, though I try personally to shoot down the middle with an emphasis on how what we know about the camera or lens technically (for example from MTFs or DXO type material) translates into the real world, along with all of the ergonomic and haptic factors that affect one's ability as a shooter to realise the best from the camera. And whilst one can't be 100% objective I think one can get quite a lot of the way there. However, readers of reviews vary very widely in what they think reasonable or worthwhile and though most are very realistic, some can be really quite unrealistic. The great example was a while back when Lula did a review of various M lenses on the M9 versus the Nex 7 and made a decision, perfectly reasonably, to down-res the Nex file for the comparison. All hell broke lose, despite MR freely admitting that there were other ways to skin this particular cat. In the end reviewers have to anticipate what a reasonable reader will consider reasonable and not sweat to much what the more extreme opinions may be. Otherwise there would be no reviews at all! Which some people would be fine with, but there is clearly a very big appetite for people to get an informed opinion before dropping $$$$$.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
krooj Posted May 1, 2013 Share #67 Posted May 1, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) ... I try personally to shoot down the middle with an emphasis on how what we know about the camera or lens technically (for example from MTFs or DXO type material) translates into the real world ... If one can successfully pull this off, it's a damned impressive review, because it means that not only do you understand the DXO-esque tech like the back of your hand, but you also have extended and meaningful experience as a photographer, such that you can compare and contrast with previous equipment. I'd hazard a guess that most *soft* reviewers fall into the latter camp, while testing labs in the former. Neither exclusive type is helpful to any amateur, or even the majority of working photographers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tanks Posted May 1, 2013 Share #68 Posted May 1, 2013 ... But maybe I’m just envious. For my review in the latest issue of LFI I had compared shutter and recocking sounds of the M and M9, measured shutter lag in various modes, also live view latency, and luminance and chroma noise. That didn’t generate quite the same buzz. Apparently because assessments like “The color…oh the color. Color can be MUCH MUCH richer and more beautiful than it was with the M9.” are much more meaningful. I will try a more ‘Real World’ approach in the next issue; we will see how it pans out. I guess it is the style that makes a difference as well. A dry review will turn most typical people off. Personally, I am interested in technical details, but most important is how those technical details translate to using the camera and IQ. Comparing the shutter sound to that of an obsolete older model, not so much. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcs700s Posted May 1, 2013 Share #69 Posted May 1, 2013 I guess it is the style that makes a difference as well. A dry review will turn most typical people off. Personally, I am interested in technical details, but most important is how those technical details translate to using the camera and IQ. Comparing the shutter sound to that of an obsolete older model, not so much. I think this is the point as there are different kinds of reviews. Some are technical and some are "real world" which is what Steve does. The issue is don't criticize one or the other. If you prefer technical, which at times I do too, then great. If you prefer real world, which at times I do, then great. Live and let live and quit bashing the poor guy just because he doesn't review the way you want. Again, I have found his reviews on the X1 and X2 to be spot on. I own both of them and am glad I do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
THEME Posted May 1, 2013 Share #70 Posted May 1, 2013 Steve is not a businessman. He's emotional, he's a gear aficionado and he adores photography. What better for others than someone who gives it all and sacrifices everything for the sake of a very fun, informative and engaged blog. Review gear is usually given to the reviewer for two weeks or so for free. But there are no demo models available. Steve most likely wanted to have the M 240 hands-on report up quickly, so he was even willing to pay for something that he could most possibly get for free from Leica -- but only at a later date. Criticism comes with the territory, but basically Steve is making clear he's totally in it for photography. How could he be in it for the money. There is no money in this kind of online publishing (there are a few rare exceptions, however), or at least not enough money for such kind of gear while many who criticize him don't have to worry about money at all. The only worry they have is whether to buy a second or third backup M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tanks Posted May 1, 2013 Share #71 Posted May 1, 2013 Steve is not a businessman. ... Criticism comes with the territory, but basically Steve is making clear he's totally in it for photography. How could he be in it for the money. There is no money in this kind of online publishing (there are a few rare exceptions, however) while many who criticize him don't have to worry about money at all. ... I'll disagree on one point. He is a businessman and his blog is his full time job. He is making money off of views, and click-throughs. And more power to him for turning his passion into his livelihood. I think I sense some jealousy among some of his critics. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted May 1, 2013 Share #72 Posted May 1, 2013 I really don't understand what all the fuzz is about. I personally am grateful for reviews from both Michael and Steve. Before I got to play with an M, I was happy to read any article about the camera, no matter how it was written. And in life in general, I have no problem with people who are enthusiastic and later change their mind. That's better than not ever being passionate about anything. I compare it to Oktoberfest: you party and drink, are boisterous and exuberant, and have a lot of fun. The next morning, you wake up with a bad hangover asking yourself "why did I do that?" The honeymoon is over and you send back one of the $7,000+ cameras. No harm no foul. So now everybody please stop acting as if we all had to pay $15 for reading Steve's reviews. They are basically free. So thank you Steve, keep doing what you do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcs700s Posted May 1, 2013 Share #73 Posted May 1, 2013 I'll disagree on one point. He is a businessman and his blog is his full time job. He is making money off of views, and click-throughs. And more power to him for turning his passion into his livelihood. I think I sense some jealousy among some of his critics. Obvious jealousy in these posts which I have pointed out before. I have learned much in sixty years. One is to rejoice with others. I am happy for Steve and read his blog daily. I visit here daily and post occasionally too. Glad I found this forum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Postelnikov Posted May 1, 2013 Share #74 Posted May 1, 2013 Why then would anyone care about these reviews? If ‘review’ was even the right word for this. Even when I am reviewing cameras I happen to like I don’t get all excited, or not in public anyway. When someone is giddy with excitement about their new toy, that’s fine with me. I would never regard it as a review, though. But maybe I’m just envious. For my review in the latest issue of LFI I had compared shutter and recocking sounds of the M and M9, measured shutter lag in various modes, also live view latency, and luminance and chroma noise. That didn’t generate quite the same buzz. Apparently because assessments like “The color…oh the color. Color can be MUCH MUCH richer and more beautiful than it was with the M9.” are much more meaningful. I will try a more ‘Real World’ approach in the next issue; we will see how it pans out. Michael, as I see it - it is so unprofessional to say like that. "Hey guys, I am so cool. I am writing to LFI in scientific way, not like a stupid Steve." Sorry, but I have not read your review, I have paid for LFI in App Store but this problem was not passion enough for me to read it. Does it mean you wrote a bullshit? No, it is just not what I need. I have read Steve article, all the words. And as I believe him when he say that the color can be much much richer than it was with the M9, it tells me much more than some boring tests. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueweed Posted May 1, 2013 Share #75 Posted May 1, 2013 Dont see what's the big deal on steve. A person that contributes to photography is better than no contribution at all. What a sad state this forum has become. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted May 1, 2013 Share #76 Posted May 1, 2013 I'll disagree on one point. He is a businessman and his blog is his full time job. He is making money off of views, and click-throughs. And more power to him for turning his passion into his livelihood. I think I sense some jealousy among some of his critics. Remember before the internet, back when you could call up a friend who was a real live working photographer and ask him what he thought about the new camera he had been using? That is how I make decisions about what gear to buy, people who actually use it to make a living rather than people who hardly have time to shoot because they are trying to pick apart a camera and become the next "Internet Gear Review Hero" or "Web Sensation". Seriously, I can not begin to take in all the gear head centric "My 50 Lux Lens Cap Review" or even lame posts like "D800 does freshly painted curb on 42nd Street, NYC"...UGH! Maybe some find value in constantly reading what the Internet Gear Review Hero writes because they secretly wish they could be that Web Sensation too...I dunno...it seems to be a major distraction from making actual photographs...kind of pathetic to me... I was recently offered $500 to write a practical user review of the X100S that I have had for awhile now. I politely declined citing that it would get in the way of making the kind of photographs that brought that person to me in the first place.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted May 1, 2013 Share #77 Posted May 1, 2013 Steve acquires a new M240 and gets X traffic. Discussion about his review increases X to X+ His announcement re selling M generates more traffic, X++ He then says he can't live without an M240, so buys another and gets Y traffic. Forums discuss his change of heart and attracts more traffic, Y+ And so on ...... X++ & Y+ & Z, U, W is always more than X on its own, so more income. Steve measures traffic and click-thoughts every day and can see when the histograms tell him to make afresh approach. Quality helps, but is second place to quantity. He's sold his M and this thread, and similar on other Forums, are busy driving his click-throughs up. Wood and trees spring to mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted May 1, 2013 Share #78 Posted May 1, 2013 Seriously, I can not begin to take in all the gear head centric "My 50 Lux Lens Cap Review" or even lame posts like "D800 does freshly painted curb on 42nd Street, NYC"...UGH! Everyone who has ever written about photo gear topics can be accused of being gear head centric (me too). A celebration of Kodachrome is gear head centric (film is gear too). Before the Internet, people wrote about gear for magazines and in books. Not everyone had a friend who was a working photographer whom they could call for gear advice; and if they did, likely the pro's gear choices were very specific to their photography & business. What is different now is that publishing is much wider and flatter, so almost anyone is a potential publisher. And there is a lot more content and more easily accessible, so potentially more distractions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iforum Posted May 1, 2013 Share #79 Posted May 1, 2013 A slow day in the office thread"........ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richfx Posted May 1, 2013 Share #80 Posted May 1, 2013 Leave the poor guy alone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.