What do M Monochrom reviews say about the reviewers?

semilog said:
So should B&W look like D. Moriyama, E. Richards, E. Weston, S. Salgado, or R. Avedon? It can't look like all of them so we're looking forward to you telling us which four of these five have/had it wrong.
Click to expand...

Agreed Semilog. Stating that these reviewers have no idea what B&W should look like is ridiculous. Personally, I think it should look like whatever the hell makes them happy. Who really cares what reviewers, photographers, experts, whatever thinks.....I'll say it again - for the people who couldn't care less about the Monochrom, they usually don't 'need' to rant on about it. Those that do waste their time ranting are usually those who are negative because they cannot obtain it. Why else would they go to the trouble of ranting about something they 'apparently' don't care for?

Thats my final comment on this. I need to go shoot, and I suggest others do the same instead of wasting time on this silly debate.
 
I love your insight.

Seems to me that the likes of Huff, Kim, etc call themselves reviewers. Yet, their ultimate goal is to become mouthpieces for the company they love in the hope that they get the exclusive scoop for the next M model.

They aren't reviews. They are infomercials.

Dante_Stella said:
It seems that everyone and his brother is attempting to get an M Monochrom review up (and to reap any attendant click-throughs, subscriptions, etc.). The technical discussions (or attempts thereat) do not seem particularly interesting. We can take it at face value (and if not that, then Erwin Put's tests) that the M resolves 20% more than an M9 and we can take it on faith that the camera is most sensitive to yellow-green light.

But what I find more interesting is what is sometimes between the lines of these reviews and sometimes out in the open: the philosophical development of reviewers; their relative competence with understanding the effects of color on tonality, and their overall skill levels in photography.

My personal editorial comment is that after seeing these pieces, I am less interested in what these people have to write - whether about the M or anything else. What's your take?
Click to expand...
 
Agreed Semilog. Stating that these reviewers have no idea what B&W should look like is ridiculous. Personally, I think it should look like whatever the hell makes them happy. Who really cares what reviewers, photographers, experts, whatever thinks.....I'll say it again - for the people who couldn't care less about the Monochrom, they usually don't 'need' to rant on about it. Those that do waste their time ranting are usually those who are negative because they cannot obtain it. Why else would they go to the trouble of ranting about something they 'apparently' don't care for?

Thats my final comment on this. I need to go shoot, and I suggest others do the same instead of wasting time on this silly debate.
Click to expand...
+1! Although it is a bit like getting stuck , while surfing the tube, on a TV show that's so bad, you can't turn it off. :rolleyes:

Cheers, Matt
 
. . . . . off topic.

Nothing to say about 'reviewers' . . . . .

. . . . . but I would own a Leica MM if I had the money and could find one in inventory. Not for everyone but from what I have seen, I would own one without hesitation.
 
What`s the fuss ? From the short time I had a possibility to use it, the picture quality of M-M is fantastic, but ONLY if you are making gallery size prints. It all boils down to the fact: What`s your aim, for what you are shooting. If you just carry it around and maybe post images in Internet, the M8 in B&W mode is perfectly O.K.
If you are into "B&W reportage style rough images" why not just use a M6 and 400 asa film and develop it in Rodinal ?
 
People are funny. If they like/purchase something they're oftentimes inclined to proselytize that thing. Like they need to rationalize the choice they made.

Then you have people who don't like/can't rationalize/can't obtain something - they're oftentimes inclined to denigrate the thing. Like they're trying to convince themselves.

Why do film (exclusively film) people frequent digital forums/threads?

Why do digital (exclusively digital) people frequent film forums/threads?

Why do people who don't like something, for whatever reason, feel so compelled to denigrate those who appear to have a different opinion? Why are people so insecure that they need continual validation of their choices/positions?

People are funny...

As for the question the OP raised - I'd posit that we see 'reviews' of all different products that run the gamut from weak to strong, from specious to insightful, for virtually all products. Not just the MM.
 
sparrow6224 said:
Dante's thought was vastly more nuanced than the weary subjects almost all the critic-bashing responses have addressed. What he seems to be saying from what I can tell is that the Monochrom has created a photographic situation that reveals not only the technical knowledge that certain writers lack, but also has exposed a deep lack of intelligent understanding of what b&w (vs color) photography really is, and is about. To such a degree that he now sees certain writers as not even readable after reading them on the Monochrom -- by virtue NOT of all the common sins everyone likes to blunder on about, but by virtue of a deeper limitation they've been forced to expose in their photographic understanding. Whereas previously had had not believed this about them. In this sense the Monochrom represents another turning point in the history of the art of photography because it is forcing digital photography to face choices that film users faced for a long time. (If you accept, and you might well not, but I do, that a digital file converted to black and white and played with for effects is not the same as a black and white photograph...) For me, I find that I have to train my eye to see the world completely differently when I'm shooting in color; that what is interesting in an image in b/w is not interesting in color, that in the end the most interesting thing in color is color, and interesting colors are hard to find. Whereas interesting light and shadow is everywhere. And this is true of landscapes, streets, and the human face.
Click to expand...

Well said.....
 
leicashot said:
A professional/creditable street photographer is someone who has proven themselves over a number of years by contributing paid/unpaid quality work to publications online/offline....not someone who started blogging about a profession he has no experience about. I have nothing against Eric Kim, but I know many people that do, mainly due to the way he is teaching street photography - and he's copying Bruce Gilden's 'approach', and not achieving his 'execution'.

That approach creates a bad rap for street photographers who are very passionate about what they do. Digital photography and social networking has made people very conscious and aware of photos being taken in public, and that kind of direct, confronting approach only places stronger restrictions on photographers.

Another example is what happened in Melbourne, where Eric nearly got arrested. Instead of walking away from a woman unhappy with her picture being taken, he sticks around and awaits police so he can make a video about it. But it was he who instigated the whole thing. He could have just walked away, but it made better entertainment by sticking around. This kind of behavior is not good for street photographers' reputations.

I am only speaking on behalf of some serious street photographers who aren't happy with the way he goes about his business. Personally, I think what he is doing needs to be adjusted but I certainly won't hate on someone just cause they're doing well. I'm sure he's a nice guy with good intentions, but maybe needs to re-look at his approach and effects it's having.

I know that while he is deemed a Leica 'ambassador', Leica are quietly denying it. They obviously want the numbers he draws in through social media, but don't want the negative side of his reputation tarnishing the historial brand associated with mainly Magnum Photographers.....and now, Eric Kim....Sorry Leica, you can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...

Oh man the "how" in my question was supposed to be a "who"!?! I agree with your definition/description of a street photographer and the detrimental effects of Kim's method. But I'm more interested in finding about who you consider a street photographer? Preferably some one whose still active and some one whose work I can see in print not online or a monitor.
 
Who is Eric Kim? The Hong Kong guy who try's to be funny while gushing about the sublime tactile experience of using a Leica?

I don't consider him a " reviewer."
 
Teuthida said:
Who is Eric Kim? The Hong Kong guy who try's to be funny while gushing about the sublime tactile experience of using a Leica?

I don't consider him a " reviewer."
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure Eric Kim is based in Los Angeles, though he does teach abroad. Is is an Asian American, and I don't think he does reviews. You might be thinking of the fella from Digital Rev with a British accent. He does claim to do reviews.
 
CaptZoom said:
Oh man the "how" in my question was supposed to be a "who"!?! I agree with your definition/description of a street photographer and the detrimental effects of Kim's method. But I'm more interested in finding about who you consider a street photographer? Preferably some one whose still active and some one whose work I can see in print not online or a monitor.
Click to expand...

Here is the first place to look for today's premiere street photographers. These guys didn't jump on the bandwagon when digital made photography easier. This was originally co-founded by Magnum photographer Trent Parke http://www.in-public.com/

This is what I call real, dedicated street photography by true professionals.

Also, his Australian agency here, more so in the documentary genre: http://www.oculi.com.au/
 
I've looked at some of these reviews, and if they had great photos to go with there words I may have read a little more deeply.
 
Why all of a sudden the attacks on Leica reviewers? How has the Monochrom changed that? Is it that people believe it's a horrible camera and the reviewers need to be able to take great pictures to review cameras? In history, most reviewers aren't great photographers, and great photographers wouldn't be able to make great reviews because they usually care little for the gear. As a matter of fact if you measure by numbers only, the most successful reviewer is Kai Wong of Digital Rev, who is a very average photographer, but entertaining to an extent and draws in the numbers.

Nothing has changed, so why now? The Monochrom is every bit as good as the reviewers say. What do people want? Bad reviews of a great camera because they are unable to obtain it? I know it's a great camera from experience, in the field. Whether my pictures are good on not does not make my opinion any less valid. A camera is still a lightbox with a sensor, so what people are essentially reviewing is the sensor. We all know what the Leica M line can do.

Seriously, of course reviewers don't want to upset the manufacturer's feeding them their equipment for reviewing, which ends up feeding their families? If they become too critical, who will want to supply them gear to review?

Tell me one truly objective reviewer (maybe Lloyd Chambers) who is 100% honest about their reviews? How long would they last at their trade?

Like I said earlier, if you think you can do better, go do it. Make better reviews, take better photos and criticise the crap out of products so you don't look like you're kissing butt. Then will people be happy? ......ok now I'm done ;)
 
leicashot said:
Why all of a sudden the attacks on Leica reviewers? How has the Monochrom changed that? Is it that people believe it's a horrible camera and the reviewers need to be able to take great pictures to review cameras?

Nothing has changed, so why now? The Monochrom is every bit as good as the reviewers say. What do people want? Bad reviews of a great camera because they are unable to obtain it? I know it's a great camera from experience, in the field. Whether my pictures are good on not does not make my opinion any less valid. A camera is still a lightbox with a sensor, so what people are essentially reviewing is the sensor. We all know what the Leica M line can do.

Seriously, of course reviewers don't want to upset the manufacturer's feeding them their equipment for reviewing, which ends up feeding their families? If they become too critical, who will want to supply them gear to review?

Tell me one truly objective reviewer (maybe Lloyd Chambers) who is 100% honest about their reviews? How long would they last at their trade?

Like I said earlier, if you think you can do better, go do it. Make better reviews, take better photos and criticise the crap out of products so you don't look like you're kissing butt. Then will people be happy?
Click to expand...
Exactly. Generally, if I don't like something, I don't review it. Sometimes I don't review it because it doesn't interest me all that much; sometimes because I can´t get one, sometimes, because I don't think anyone would pay me to do so. Sometimes, all four.

Inevitably, a review concentrates on what a camera (car, food mixer...) can do, and either skates over what it can't do or says (which is what I try to do) "If you want to do so-and-so, maybe this isn't the camera (car, food mixer...) for you."

Cheers,

R.
 
Dante, Dante, Dante --- Will you please stop laughing; it's really interfering with my tinitus.

.............. Chris
 
Any harshness is well-deserved when the reviewers are untrained amateurs journalists with agendas that don't necessarily put their readers before their own interests and needs.

Telling us to start doing reviews ourselves if we don't appreciate those reviewers does not make sense to me. We would just add to the problem. Besides, there is no precedent for reviewers in any field to act that way. Food critics aren't told to become chefs; movie critics aren't told to become directors or actors and automotive reviewers aren't expected to design automobiles. Why should photographers reviewing camera reviewers be any different?

And, mundane and low-quality reviews do not determine the M9M's potential, Leica does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom