View Full Version : Review of M8 from a photographer
Sean Reid from http://www.reidreviews.com has completed a comprehensive review of the M8 from a photographers point of view. The current review is part 1 of 2 and it goes into details not covered by your typical review. Although it as a fee based website, it is definetly worth the read.
Sean's a good reviewer and writer, but I never pay fees to read someone's opinion...
gene
Huck Finn
09-17-2006, 18:10
I second Jorge's recommendation. The $25 annual fee is nominal for what you get, which is just about the best equipment reviews out there, which avoid the silly comparisons of which is the best & which report descriptions of how the equipment actually performs & what the results are.
I might add that every time we buy a magazine, we pay for someone's opinion.
Thank ya Jorge!
GeneW,
Thanks and I appreciate your point of view. To each his own.
Hiya Huck,
Thanks. You have an even better point of view <G>...just kidding.
BTW, my review was published about 2 mins. before Phil Askey's (just for the historical records <G>). Many on this site have probably read it already.
Cheers,
Sean
I'm quite impressed with what I'm reading about the M8. It's still going to be well outside of what I can afford to spend on a camera but it looks like Leica got a lot of things right.
I paid for Sean's site, but thanks to Pay-Pal it is still locked against me :( :bang:
Let's hope it will be resolved soon.
Nachkebia
09-18-2006, 03:09
jaapv : same here! My country is not even listed!
Jaap,
You should be all set now.
Nachkebia,
E-Mail me.
Cheers,
Sean
All set Sean! The review answered the PM I sent you as well! Great.
pstevenin
09-18-2006, 05:20
I'm also a Sean's reviews fan, as he depicts the way he use a gear as a photographer, not to mention other very interesting general articles.
In fact, I try to avoid read him too often, which always induces GAS ;) .
Waiting now for M8 part.2
Philippe.
PS: by the way Sean, you have my private E-mail. Can you just send me some M8 shots? I promise I will not share them:angel:
Sean,
Your business model is going to limit your business growth. The only reviews that cost money are the ones that is going to, at least, look like it's going to make me a lot of $$$, like stock reviews. What $$$ are your reviews going to help me make? All camera equipment review sites make their money from ads.
Good luck!
Nachkebia
09-18-2006, 06:20
Well he reviews some stuff that nobody does, like ZM lenses, and I am ready paying for it, so are alot of people like me :)
The $25 I payed was quickly earned back as Sean's reviews informed me that neither of the two cameras that I was interested in (D-Lux 2 and Ricoh GRd) were anything worth buying for me..:D
/Håkan
The $25 I payed was quickly earned back as Sean's reviews informed me that neither of the two cameras that I was interested in (D-Lux 2 and Ricoh GRd) were anything worth buying for me..:D
/Håkan
He turned thumbs down to the GR-D? Interesting--glad I didn't buy one. I was scared off by the curious limited market and expected resulting poor service. Now leaning toward the high ISO Fuji F30 for lower light than my film cameras can go w/o flash.
I registered an account there just to read his review. It's worth it.
Sean,
Your business model is going to limit your business growth. The only reviews that cost money are the ones that is going to, at least, look like it's going to make me a lot of $$$, like stock reviews. What $$$ are your reviews going to help me make? All camera equipment review sites make their money from ads.
Good luck!
So you don't pay for your photo-magazines either? interesting....
wparsons
09-18-2006, 12:15
For the skeptics, Sean's reviews are required reading for photographers. He doesn't just tell you what he thinks about the item under review, he also compares it to alternatives -- over a complete price range -- and displays pictures taken with the lenses and bodies. Wanna see a kilobuck lens compared to one that costs a few hundred dollars? With pictures, so you can visualize the product? Look no further.
Well, if you look further, you'll see that no one else does this.
I just bot a used Leica 24mm f2.8 asph lens based on the images I saw in his review.
The review helped me in the following way: I was contemplating a new, wide lens and didn't know how to evaluate them. I use a 35mm f1.4 asph in my stage photography work and the M8 turns this lens into a 46mm lens, so it no longer covers enough of the stage.
I was trying to decide between a 21 and 28 mm lens, but when I saw the images on Sean's site from the 24mm lens, I was blown away.
In addition, Puts rates this lens at the acme of Leica lenses -- ignore his current unpopularity following his M8 review (sorry, haven't read it).
The images did it for me. I bot the 24mm lens.
The fee for Sean's site is worth more than any equivalent expenditure in my photographic year. If you want to make jokes about only valuing things that are free, you will have a wonderful time tasting your sardonicism, but you won't get valuable information about lenses and bodies.
BTW, he reviews things other than Leica's. I don't own any other stuff, but the reviews are still brilliant.
Also BTW -- his web site is free. Go look and see some exceptional architectural photography and some wonderful, warm wedding pix.
Knock yourself out (thank you "I Spy").
Bill
Sean,
Your business model is going to limit your business growth. The only reviews that cost money are the ones that is going to, at least, look like it's going to make me a lot of $$$, like stock reviews. What $$$ are your reviews going to help me make? All camera equipment review sites make their money from ads.
Good luck!
Is it really? Well, thanks for your opinion. The site is a year old and has actually been quite successful because it offers a very unique kind of content that is not easily found elsewhere. I've never been much of a "me too" guy so I 'm not too concerned about what other sites do. The world didn't need *yet another* typical camera review site. It's pretty simple really; in photography or in writing, I expend time and effort to create something useful and people who value it pay me for that thing. If you are a professional photographer, I would think you should understand that system.
In any case, we all make our own rules as to what's worth spending money on and what isn't. To each his own. By the same token, I've designed RR to be exactly what I want it to be.
Cheers,
Sean
He turned thumbs down to the GR-D? Interesting--glad I didn't buy one. I was scared off by the curious limited market and expected resulting poor service. Now leaning toward the high ISO Fuji F30 for lower light than my film cameras can go w/o flash.
I definitely did not give a thumbs down to the GR. I looked at its pros and cons, as I do for every camera, lens, etc. I'm not interested in telling people what they should buy, only in trying to describe things honestly and accurately. It's then up to the photographer to decide how well a given camera or lens suits him. Many people bought the GR because of my review and many didn't because of the same review. In fact, I think that many people get duped into thinking that they need to buy certain gear in order to make strong pictures when that often is not the case. I also wrote an article for photographers who've chosen to stay with inexpensive older cameras and film (that piece prompted by an e-mail from a subscriber who's a retired minister and lives on a very tight budget).
BTW, to the people above who value RR and took the time to say so in this thread, thank you kindly.
Cheers,
Sean
Sean: I just signed up with your site; especially to read your M8 opinions. I have one problem: How can I print your review out, so I can read at my liesure, possibly propped up in bed with my night light, or sitting on my deck sipping a cold one?
Thanks
Dave G retired in NJ
Sean: I just signed up with your site; especially to read your M8 opinions. I have one problem: How can I print your review out, so I can read at my liesure, possibly propped up in bed with my night light, or sitting on my deck sipping a cold one?
Thanks
Dave G retired in NJ
Hi Dave,
Thanks for subscribing. I'm afraid that there is no way to print or copy the reviews because otherwise the site would essentially have no security (it could all be PDF'd easily in that case). I understand and sometimes like to print reviews myself but there's just way around it. I do explain this in the pre-subscription instructions but you may have not seen that.
Cheers,
Sean
What $$$ are your reviews going to help me make?
For example the $$$ saved on a prevented bad buy, or simply for not buying all the gear to test yourself.
All camera equipment review sites make their money from ads.
So you prefer a reviewer paid by the ads (= company which make the gear he's testing) instead of one paid by their readers ?
Phil Askey gives honest opinions for free (though his site is probably the biggest on the net, photography related), but I appreciate Sean's approach.
I suggest you at least to try it (read his articles on luminous-landscape), his reviews are among the best you could find, with many aspects I never seen discussed in other "free" sites.
I would like to se a review of the new 28/2,8 ASPH... and Leica lenses on the M8, of course (including classical lenses like the Noctilux or the 75/1,4... a magnifying lens would be needed?).
I would like to se a review of the new 28/2,8 ASPH... and Leica lenses on the M8, of course (including classical lenses like the Noctilux or the 75/1,4... a magnifying lens would be needed?).
I'm planning to review the 28/2.8 as well as various other lenses on the M8. There will be a whole new set of lens tests just as there was with the R-D1.
Cheers,
Sean
<snip> It's pretty simple really; in photography or in writing, I expend time and effort to create something useful and people who value it pay me for that thing. <snip>
Cheers,
Sean
WHAT??? Paying for value received??? Are you MAD, Sean? I want everything for FREE!!!! It's my right as a [insert nationality here] ... I demand to be served at no cost to myself!!!
(No, I haven't signed up yet, but I shall. In the meantime, I shan't complain that you haven't sent me the review as PDF through the RFF email contact facility just cuz I'm a really, really swell guy.)
Cheers/Slainte,
Earl of Dunbar
PS With all due respect to my dear, DEAR friends who may feel otherwise.
Thanks Sean. I understand about theft. I really really want to print out your reviews, as a retired older guy, so I can read sitting in my easy chair in lieu of trying to follow a long narative on screen. Perhaps you could offer as an additional service (at a fee) to print out and snail mail (or email a printable version) of selected articles. I must admit I did not finish reading the M8 review today as I just could not sit and read from my PC screen any longer. Don't misunderstand: I am active as a photographer, fine art printer, etc but my PC attention span is not what it used to be. The kind of work I do is here:
www.modernpictorials.com (http://www.modernpictorials.com)
Keep up the good work.....
Dave G in NJ
Thanks Sean. I understand about theft. I really really want to print out your reviews, as a retired older guy, so I can read sitting in my easy chair in lieu of trying to follow a long narative on screen. Perhaps you could offer as an additional service (at a fee) to print out and snail mail (or email a printable version) of selected articles. I must admit I did not finish reading the M8 review today as I just could not sit and read from my PC screen any longer. Don't misunderstand: I am active as a photographer, fine art printer, etc but my PC attention span is not what it used to be. The kind of work I do is here:
www.modernpictorials.com (http://www.modernpictorials.com)
Keep up the good work.....
Dave G in NJ
Hi Dave,
Thanks and, believe me, I hear you. My developer and I went round and round on this issue but at the end of the day anything that can be printed or copied can be pirated, distributed, etc.. The evidence of that is all over the place, unfortunately.
It's not a question of charging more money for a printable version but just the obvious protection of the content itself. So, I just try to make the terms very clear on the web site so that people can read them before they decide whether or not to subscribe. I'm hoping that people who signed up to read about the M8 also look at some of the other articles as well.
Cheers,
Sean
Mark Norton
09-18-2006, 20:36
That's exactly what I did - go and re-read some of the other articles, especially the DMR/Canon comparison because that is the best view we can currently get of likely M8 image quality. Never used a Canon camera - my DSLR is a D2X - but the comparison was interesting.
I expect that there will be other useful articles coming along in relation to the M8, and I've suggested elsewhere a "super-wide options" article to compare the CV 12/15-Zeiss 15-New Tri-Elmar routes for going wider than 28mm eq FoV. The CV 15, for example is 10-15% of the cost of the T-E and seems worth considering if you don't go that wide very often.
Sean,
I have no problem paying for your reviews. But I'm not sure I want to pay for an annual "subscription." Did you ever consider having a charge for each review individually, as an alternative for people like me who may want to read just one of them, or a few?
Did you ever consider having a charge for each review individually, as an alternative for people like me who may want to read just one of them, or a few?
They are addictive, trust me... once you read one you will be eager for more... in the end it would be more expensive than the annual subscription ;) :p
Jim Watts
09-19-2006, 04:25
Sean,
I have moved this part of the discussion from the Putts Thread to here as you suggested below:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Watts
Hi Sean,
I do change ISO often especially when in low to moderate low light so the fact that this is menu driven is more of a problem for me than exposure compensation, but its not a deal breaker. I think that we (rightly if the possiblity is there) are expecting much more from digital than film in this respect. When I was shooting more film I had to change the roll to change the ISO or use two bodies with a different film in each.
I have just brought a Ricoh GRD, which I know you have used, the 'adjust wheel' means of changing ISO in the menu here seems pretty quick. If in the M8 ISO (can be made to) appear(s) on the first screen and changed with a quick couple of button presses it should be OK. An implementation like on the new Pentax DSLR would have been nice though. Set up and lower limits for ISO, set the exposure combination and let the camera vary the ISO between those limits.
Of course if I keep my RD-1 (which I will) and buy the M8 (which I am seriously considering) I could use two digital bodies. I note from one of your other posts that you intend to keep 1 RD-1 and add 1 M8. It seems to me from what I have heard of the M8 so far this would make a great combination as they compliment rather than duplicate one & other. Have you done any shoots using both? Can you share the experience?
The cost of the M8 in the UK although better than I expected is still high for me. I will probably end up selling my (fairly rare) black chrome M4 to fund an M8 purchase, but it will be reluctant to part with it as I have had it from new for over 30 years. Realistically though it has seen much less use since getting the RD-1 (mainly to cover the wide angle end) and an M8 with its frames and crop to give a wider field of view would satisfy me here.
Hi Jim,
If it's not too much trouble, would you mind quoting this into a new thread and we'll start there. I'm not so keen on contributing to keeping the Erwin Puts thread alive. I'm dissapointed enough in Erwin's article as is.
In fact, let's just move the discussion (with respect to questions for me) into the thread about my review rather than Erwin's. Erwin should be answering questions in this thread, rather than myself.
Cheers,
Sean
__________________
Sean Reid
Photographer/Writer
Member WPJA
http://www.reidreviews.com
http://www.still-photo.net
Originally Posted by Jim Watts
Hi Sean,
I do change ISO often especially when in low to moderate low light so the fact that this is menu driven is more of a problem for me than exposure compensation, but its not a deal breaker. I think that we (rightly if the possiblity is there) are expecting much more from digital than film in this respect. When I was shooting more film I had to change the roll to change the ISO or use two bodies with a different film in each.
I have just brought a Ricoh GRD, which I know you have used, the 'adjust wheel' means of changing ISO in the menu here seems pretty quick. If in the M8 ISO (can be made to) appear(s) on the first screen and changed with a quick couple of button presses it should be OK. An implementation like on the new Pentax DSLR would have been nice though. Set up and lower limits for ISO, set the exposure combination and let the camera vary the ISO between those limits.
Of course if I keep my RD-1 (which I will) and buy the M8 (which I am seriously considering) I could use two digital bodies. I note from one of your other posts that you intend to keep 1 RD-1 and add 1 M8. It seems to me from what I have heard of the M8 so far this would make a great combination as they compliment rather than duplicate one & other. Have you done any shoots using both? Can you share the experience?
Hi Jim,
Thanks. I have worked with both cameras side by side. In fact, RFF's own Ed Schwartzreich did the same and should chime in here too.
The R-D1 sits better in my hand than the M8 (although the M8 with the grip attached fits me quite well). I also prefer the R-D1's displays for EV, ISO, etc. The R-D1's wonderful gauges may not be seen again soon, if ever. I don't like having to use the LCD to change certain settings on the M8 although it's certainly not the end of the world.
I do like the Epson's 1:1 finder but I *really* like having the 32 EFOV frame lines in the M8. The M8 is also a much faster camera: review image on the LCD comes up almost instantly and the RAW buffer is dramatically better. The Leica finder is also higher quality and one can see that using the two side by side. The M8 is also quieter.
Then there's the file quality but I can't get into that yet.
More later,
S
Sean,
how about focus accuracy compared to the R-D1 ?
I guess the 1.25x magnifier would be mandatory to better frame/focus with my 75 Apo.
Thanks :)
John Camp
09-19-2006, 06:10
Is the 1.25x magnifier for the M8 the same as the one used on the M7, etc.?
Sean,
how about focus accuracy compared to the R-D1 ?
I guess the 1.25x magnifier would be mandatory to better frame/focus with my 75 Apo.
Thanks :)
The focus was dead on with the camera Leica lent me. The 1.25 magnifier is the current one that also works on the M7, etc. and it would be a good idea for the 75.
Cheers,
Sean
Sean: did your review sample lens have the 6 bit coding? Did you use any 2nd party non coded lenses? I already have the following lenses, which I plan on using with the M8:
CV 15mm which I plan on using with my CV 21mm finder
CV 21mm which I will use with CV 28mm finder
Leica 24mm ASPH (use with M8 finder)
CV 35mm f2.5 (use with M8 finder)
Are you allowed to disclose how the performance was with NON-CODED lenses?
Thanks in advance....
Dave G in NJ
Peter Klein
09-19-2006, 08:50
Sean's reviews are well worth their modest subscription price. I look at them kind of like public radio and television (in the U.S.)--they go into areas that the mainstream media doesn't . The funny part is that basic photographic performance is often considered esoteric now. Mainstream is weighing bells and whistles.
For one thing, Sean is rangefinder-oriented. Do any of the "mainstream" press give a rip about rangefinders? How many R-D1 reviews did we suffer through where the main content was "Gee, it's not a DSLR. What, no autofocus? How retro. How quaint." Duh.
Did dpreview or Steve's do a review of the R-D1? Sean did. How about extensive A/B comparisons of Leica, Voigtlander, and Zeiss RF lenses as they actually draw an image? Sean did. Etc.
What makes Sean's writing especially valuable is that he takes a photographer's approach to his reviews. The feature-by-feature approach is well represented at other sites. The latter is valuable, too. But if I had to choose between the two, I'd take Sean's reviews, simply because he looks at the same things I would look at in evaluating a camera for myself. He also is very careful to indicate his own preferences, and consider how others might differ.
The Internet is filled with people who think they know exactly how everybody should run their business. Sean is providing a valuable service, and doing it in a way that works for him. He's got to make a living, he can't write for free. So we pay him a bit, he can afford to do a couple less weddings a year, and we get really valuable insight from him. Well worth it.
DISCLAIMER: I'm quoted on Sean's site as appreciating his reviews. And I paid for my subscription like everyone else.
--Peter
Sean: did your review sample lens have the 6 bit coding? Did you use any 2nd party non coded lenses? I already have the following lenses, which I plan on using with the M8:
CV 15mm which I plan on using with my CV 21mm finder
CV 21mm which I will use with CV 28mm finder
Leica 24mm ASPH (use with M8 finder)
CV 35mm f2.5 (use with M8 finder)
Are you allowed to disclose how the performance was with NON-CODED lenses?
Thanks in advance....
Dave G in NJ
Hi Dave,
I used the M8 with both coded and non-coded lenses but I can't talk about the results yet because it's primarily an aspect of image quality. I will be discussing that aspect in the next review.
I've mentioned this on another forum but I'll be re-doing lens tests of various focal lengths on the M8 (21, 24/25, 28, 35 and 50 at least). The following are just my hunches (based on testing lenses with the R-D1) and have not been backed up with testing yet, but my instincts say:
21: Both the Zeiss and Leica will do well on the M8, CV 21/4 will not do nearly as well
24: Leica 24 will be great, Zeiss 25 will be excellent as well if someone can modify the lens to bring up the 24 mm frame lines, CV 25/4 will not do nearly as well
28: CV 28/1.9 (but not the 28/3.5), Zeiss 28/2.8, Leica 28/2.0 and 28/2.8 will all be good options
35: CV 35/2.5, Zeiss 35/2.0, Leica 35/1.4 and 35/2.0 will all do well
50: CV 50/1.5, Zeiss 50/2.0, Leica 50/2.0 and Leica 50/1.4 will all do well
Again, my best guesses only. Don't hold me to these until I actually test them on the M8...but I think the results may be close to this list.
Cheers,
Sean
Sean's reviews are well worth their modest subscription price. I look at them kind of like public radio and television (in the U.S.)--they go into areas that the mainstream media doesn't . The funny part is that basic photographic performance is often considered esoteric now. Mainstream is weighing bells and whistles.
For one thing, Sean is rangefinder-oriented. Do any of the "mainstream" press give a rip about rangefinders? How many R-D1 reviews did we suffer through where the main content was "Gee, it's not a DSLR. What, no autofocus? How retro. How quaint." Duh.
Did dpreview or Steve's do a review of the R-D1? Sean did. How about extensive A/B comparisons of Leica, Voigtlander, and Zeiss RF lenses as they actually draw an image? Sean did. Etc.
What makes Sean's writing especially valuable is that he takes a photographer's approach to his reviews. The feature-by-feature approach is well represented at other sites. The latter is valuable, too. But if I had to choose between the two, I'd take Sean's reviews, simply because he looks at the same things I would look at in evaluating a camera for myself. He also is very careful to indicate his own preferences, and consider how others might differ.
The Internet is filled with people who think they know exactly how everybody should run their business. Sean is providing a valuable service, and doing it in a way that works for him. He's got to make a living, he can't write for free. So we pay him a bit, he can afford to do a couple less weddings a year, and we get really valuable insight from him. Well worth it.
DISCLAIMER: I'm quoted on Sean's site as appreciating his reviews. And I paid for my subscription like everyone else.
--Peter
Peter,
Thank you very much for this post, especially it describes RR in a way that's very similar to the way I see it. You gave a great description of what I'm trying to do. The way I think about photography is distinct and that finds its way into the reviews. I'm also writing specifically to serious, perhaps even passionate, photographers (professional and amateurs). Those of us who are deeply engaged in the medium have different needs than a typical consumer.
Right now the Leica M8 is "a big thing" because its new and different. It will be widely covered as long as it's news and then most sites will likely lose interest in it. I've been writing about all kinds of RF lenses and cameras (some of them fairly obscure to the general public) because I think they're important to consider as tools, not because they're especially trendy. Several article on my site aren't even about cameras or lenses, per se and there will be even more of those in 2007, including an article on what is called "street photography". Much of what I write about matters a lot to a specific group of photographers but perhaps very little to the mainstream.
How many sites last year did reviews of the superb, cheap and old Zeiss Jena 20/2.8 Flektogon? Obscure...perhaps, but that review was very useful to SLR photographers searching for good wides to use on Canon EOS bodies.
And so on....happy to take more questions about the M8 with the proviso that I can't discuss file quality yet (other than the vague general comments I've been able to sneak in).
Cheers,
Sean
Stan98103
09-19-2006, 13:54
I subscribed to Sean's site yesterday and spend most of the day reading his excellent reviews. I really enjoy his comprehensive coverage and practical point of view. The subscription is an excellent value in my opinion.
I'm looking forward to Sean's comparisons of Leica, Zeiss ZM and CV lenses on the M8. Keep up the good work!
Stan
And so on....happy to take more questions about the M8 with the proviso that I can't discuss file quality yet (other than the vague general comments I've been able to sneak in).
Okay, now that I'm a paid subscriber I've got a couple of questions that weren't covered in Part I:
-- So what, really, IS that little "blue dot" (only now we can see that it's not really blue) on the front? Plausible guesses so far on RFF have been a self-timer signal, an auto-white-balance sensor, or an external meter cell to allow the metering system to calculate the set aperture (which would be needed for EXIF header data since there's no coupling linkage between the lens' aperture ring and the body.) What does it really do, and do bad things happen if you accidentally get a finger in front of it?
-- You discussed the menu system in terms of the buttons on the left of the LCD, but not how it interacts the controller on the right. What does the controller control and how does one use it?
If this stuff is going to be in Part Deux, fine...
I subscribed to Sean's site yesterday and spend most of the day reading his excellent reviews. I really enjoy his comprehensive coverage and practical point of view. The subscription is an excellent value in my opinion.
I'm looking forward to Sean's comparisons of Leica, Zeiss ZM and CV lenses on the M8. Keep up the good work!
Stan
Glad to hear it, thanks Stan!
Sean
Okay, now that I'm a paid subscriber I've got a couple of questions that weren't covered in Part I:
-- So what, really, IS that little "blue dot" (only now we can see that it's not really blue) on the front? Plausible guesses so far on RFF have been a self-timer signal, an auto-white-balance sensor, or an external meter cell to allow the metering system to calculate the set aperture (which would be needed for EXIF header data since there's no coupling linkage between the lens' aperture ring and the body.) What does it really do, and do bad things happen if you accidentally get a finger in front of it?
-- You discussed the menu system in terms of the buttons on the left of the LCD, but not how it interacts the controller on the right. What does the controller control and how does one use it?
If this stuff is going to be in Part Deux, fine...
Hi Jim,
I'm not sure what that thing is but I'll certainly check when I get the production M8. I worked with two M8s but never gave that thing a thought. I believe, however, that it is the self-timer indicator.
I'll discuss the control wheel more in Part 2 but it works in much the same way as similar controls on DSLRs, for example it can be turned to scroll up and down within a menu.
BTW, RFF readers, jlw loaned several of the lenses used in the "Fast Lenses" article I wrote for LL last year and so he did a favor for any of us who were curious about the performance of older Canon RF lenses.
Cheers,
Sean
When I was looking at some gear Sean reviewed on RR, I subbed to the site. Well worth the $25 to get his review. As others have said, he covers alot of gear you just don't see others talking about. I got my moneys' worth up front and since then have read about the 5D, D200, Zeiss lenses and more. Those articles are still there, so the deal just gets better over time for new subscribers.
I trust a semi-private review I pay for much more than ad-funded sites. I can't remember the last time I saw a dpreview that didn't end with "Recommended" at a minimum. Same with popphoto. That said, Sean is very even-handed in his comments and anything he covers is usually some pretty desirable kit.
Anyway, another happy subber fwiw
-Oliver
Sean:
I just finished reading your article on street photography, which I think is brilliant. A thought that I would like to add: many people posting pictures on the photo forums somehow thinnk that they are documenting something. That's not how I think of what I'm doing — I like to think that I'm depicting rather than documenting. I think this difference is important — at least in what I'm trying to do — and occurred to me while I came across this terminology reading the postscript to Moriyama Daido's book, Shinjuku 19xx-20xx, the one published in Switzerland (and printed the most beautiful glossy paper that I've ever seen). The word depiction is even better in the German version of the text in that book: Darstellung.
You can see my photography (in this case with the Ricoh GR-D) at:
www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
..and by clicking on Bangkok Series you can a more logical presentation, as some of these pictures are part of a book project. Incidentally, I find the GR-D particularly good for this type of photography because it pushes me to a "looser" style that I like.
—Mitch/Potomac, MD
Sean:
I just finished reading your article on street photography, which I think is brilliant. A thought that I would like to add: many people posting pictures on the photo forums somehow thinnk that they are documenting something. That's not how I think of what I'm doing — I like to think that I'm depicting rather than documenting. I think this difference is important — at least in what I'm trying to do — and occurred to me while I came across this terminology reading the postscript to Moriyama Daido's book, Shinjuku 19xx-20xx, the one published in Switzerland (and printed the most beautiful glossy paper that I've ever seen). The word depiction is even better in the German version of the text in that book: Darstellung.
You can see my photography (in this case with the Ricoh GR-D) at:
www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
..and by clicking on Bangkok Series you can a more logical presentation, as some of these pictures are part of a book project. Incidentally, I find the GR-D particularly good for this type of photography because it pushes me to a "looser" style that I like.
—Mitch/Potomac, MD
Hi Mitch,
Thanks very much. That's an important distinction you draw. Certainly, some photographers are trying to make documents and so those priorities are foremost when the pictures are being made. Walker Evans often made a point of clarifying that his work was not documentary (but rather in what he called "a documentary style").
I think that when one is consciously creating a picture from the raw materials of the subject (as is true for representational visual art), however, he or she is indeed depicting.
I'll try to look at those Bangkok pictures today.
Cheers,
Sean
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.