Online Lens Reviews -- Why They're Usually Useless: Use Case and Weighting

Two reviewers I like are Bjorn Rorslett and Ken Rockwell. I like the way their websites are organized, and I like their comments. Some time ago, photo.net didn't allow the posting of links to the Rockwell site, saying that his remarks were not meant to be taken seriously. I don't see that at all. I find him to be a reliable source of advice. No one can be right all the time, but I'd say Ken has a pretty high batting average.

And I like Rorslett's writings, too. Very detailed reports based on actually using the lenses. I always check to see what Bjorn has to say when considering a Nikkor lens!

I find Optical Limits worth reading. Though I liked its previous name better!
 
NickTrop said:
Yet, online review sites completely ignore this (for the most part) and rate/review lenses "one size fits all" comparing each on the same criteria, equally weighted, as if a "lens is a lens" and there is no difference in use case ...
Click to expand...


Of course they do, because online reviews are one size fits all (unless you're reading a review on, say, an astro-photographery site or a macro site). As much as we would like them to be, reviews are not written for *us*, and therefore always consider things that may not be of concern to particular photographers.


This isn't the reviewers 'fault', and doesn't make them useless. It just means that you, as a photographer with your own motivations and interests, need to be able to look beyond the final score and read through a review to find the aspects that matter to you.



*As an aside, I would prefer my reviews not to consider 'value'. As a consumer you can either afford something, or you can't. To some a Leica 50mm APO is small change, to others it's a year's salary. 'Value' is not really something a reviewer can meaningfully comment on.
 
NickTrop said:
I too like Ken's site. He's an actual photographer and nary an MTF chart to be found. He's one of the better ones. Perhaps I shouldn't have included him.
Click to expand...

He does kinda like saturation cranked to 11.
Which makes my eyes bleed.

But I have found his site to be an invaluable resource for Leica and Nikon reviews.
 
I so know what you mean! Try comparing pinhole cameras for instance. Acid etched or mechanically drilled or laser drilled....what to choose....and on and on...

It makes my head hurt.
Excuse me, I have to take my medication now.
 
the reviews on my blog are generally impressions. i will admit to being a bit biased since i am a Nikon supremacist :eek::eek::eek: but some of the lenses i review are so obscure that my opinions are better than nothing :rolleyes:
 
A lot of reviews are flawed because they're trying to beat each other in being first to showcase a new lens. That means there's no time to really learn how to get the best from a lens, no time to learn its weaknesses. At best, they're first impressions.

I look at the images in the reviews first.. If it's all uninspiring brick walls and resolution charts, then the rest for sure is worthless blabber. If it's the kind of stuff that you'd frame and hang on the wall, then you know the reviewer has something meaningful to say..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom