Hot answers tagged reviews
I find that when it comes to stuff like reviews (including, but not limited to photography equipment), you probably don't want to put all your eggs in one basket for anything important. If you look at two or three (or more) reviews, however, you should start to see some common themes emerging -- ie, the lens is soft wide-open, or it focuses slowly, or it'...
The Digital Picture has good reviews of lenses for Canon bodies - pretty much every lens I've looked for has been there. They also do reviews of some lenses for Nikon bodies, of Canon bodies and of some accessories. When I've been looking for Canon lens reviews that's where I seem to end up.
dpreview.com is really the place to start in my opinion. They have tested digital cameras for quite a few years, and they have a sort of standardized test method so that you can compare reviews of different camera in a meaningful way. They also include side-by-side image samples for predecessors and competing models, which I find very valuable.
I think these two sites should not be completely lumped together. Let's let each man talk for himself. From Ken Rockwell's "About" page: Apparently the world finds my opinions very useful, but remember, they are the opinions of one man. I have a big sense of humor, and do this site to entertain you (and myself), as well as to inform and to educate. I ...
The reviewer may have used a sample of one. Lenses will vary. The reviewer is measuring scientifically in the lab, pixel peeping using test charts and compiling MTF curves. Owners of the lens are taking vacations shots and pictures of the family dog. the reveiwer has experience with a number of other lenses, including pro lenses. Owners of the 18-200mm? ...
The website dpreview.com has detailed reviews that include sample images. You can preview sample images from various models to get an idea of the results each produce. Also, check out flickr.com you can see images sorted by camera that took them as well. (The links I provided are for viewing results for the Nikon D90)
There are not many great places to get such feedback. One site that I use is 1x.com, which is known for only accepting the absolute best work. They have fantastic art there, and its useful as a milestone...if you get something accepted, you've really improved your work! Even if your art gets rejected, you can still submit it for critique. The community at ...
My favorite is dpreview, which has a Lens Review Widget that is pretty cool. They don't have a whole lot of lenses available in the widget, but you really get a good feel for the quality of the ones they have added.
DxOMark give a quantitative rating on how well a lens works on a given camera model based on the data they collect for the lens correction tool in their DxO Optics Pro application. It's another data point to use in addition to a hands-on review.
K-rock has some interesting opinions, but I often think of him as the Matt Drudge of the Photography world. I suspect most of his opinions are to generate views, and to that end, he has succeeded. Here is how I judge the opinions of online photographers; how do their own personal galleries look?
Websites like kenrockwell.com and bythom.com are entertaining and idiosyncratic. They are an expression of their owner's personality and deserve reading for that reason. But when you are looking for good guidance when selecting a lens you should rather go to one of the several sites that approach the matter in a serious disciplined way. There are a ...
Lenses project a virtual image that has a defined minimum spatial frequency. It does not matter what you use to capture the image the lens is projecting, it can be film, a low res digital sensor, a high res digital sensor, or something that far outresolves the lens itself...that doesn't change how sharp an image the LENS produces, though. This is a bit ...
Ken Rockwell does reviews as well, though I will avoid waiting for the comment from Reid and point out that some folks think he is insane... :-)
DxO Mark provide objective data on the output of camera and cameras in combination with lenses. The data comes from the testing they do on cameras and lenses for their RAW developing software "DxO Optics" so it should be fairly unbiased. I don't know enough about the technical aspects of digital photography to comment on the validity of their methodology.
For fast comparisons of technical features, http://snapsort.com/ is useful.
It probably doesn't matter. Taking great looking photos has much more to do with the photographer than the camera. A good photographer can take great photos with any camera. I suggest you decide what kind of camera to get based on the kind of shooting you do or intend to do, then visit snapsort.com to find a good model in that class. If you're going to take ...
Interesting that you put Ken Rockwell and Thom Hogan in the same question; my take is that these are very different types of people. As others have said, Ken is kind of a nut. On the other hand, I find Thom Hogan's reviews particularly compelling because they relate real experiences and read very sane - for example, Thom has a good attitude (IMO) about when ...
Try Thom Hogan's site. He is a professional photographer who uses Nikon gear and writes a lot about them and I do mean a lot. Unlike another Nikon photographer, his opinions are usually very well balanced.
A great deal here comes down to the simple fact that most of what's measured in a typical lens test has almost nothing to do with how that lens will perform in real life. First of all, most lens tests emphasize resolution. This gives some idea of the largest print you could produce from a picture and still have it look sharp -- but doesn't tell you much (if ...
It isn't a lens review site per se, but lenshero.com is a great tool for comparing lens options. Like Snapsort for cameras, they've got a lens comparison tool. The front page features a walk-through find-me-a-lens thing, which I find slick but not so useful if you've got some idea to start with. More usefully, the search/sort page lets you drill down based ...
Focussion This site uses a "token" system to encourage helpful feedback. You need to give feedback to get these tokens, and you can spend them to upload your own new photos. If you write really good feedback, other photographers may mark your feedback as helpful, and you earn even more tokens.
I think Bryan Carnathan's The Digital Picture comes closest
Here: http://www.reddit.com/r/photocritique /r/photocritique has a lot of people from reddit.com/r/photography. The subreddit is active and anyone can participate, there's no requirements like on other critique sites. Most pictures, no matter the quality, seem to get a least a couple comments.
Thom Hogan is a very reputable guy and his site has a lot of insightful info especially when it comes to lenses. I read a lot of great lens reviews from Dpreview and such, but Thom goes a step further than all of them, he actually tells you why this particular lens behaves this way in this particular situation, or what makes it underrated or overrated lens. ...
B&H Photo Video is not only a great source to buy equipment, but it is a great source of reviews and relevant information about the equipment. I usually just find the category I want, and sort by the "Top Rated" or "Relevance" and typically that will direct you right to the most popular model. Amazon also has many reviews and has a great system for ...
Of course — there has to be. Are you aware of the saying "Fast, cheap, good: pick two?" Any design has compromises. This isn't a "marketing reason" — it's a basic fact of making products which the market researchers must work from. And when you add the additional constraint that it must be compact, well, something else has to give. Take a look at my recent ...
Thom Hogan specializes in reviewing Nikon gear. I always check his site when I am checking out some new gear.
Please use answers to rate and comment on each one.
www.PhotoZone.de also has decent reviews. They started with lens reviews some years ago but they also do DSLR reviews nowadays.
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible