Be Careful about Reviews
Oct 2, 2017 15:50:57 #
larryepage
Loc: North Texas area
Because of a change in commitments and some additional outside opportunities, including joining a local photography club which I've discovered, I will be sharply reducing my participation on this forum. But I did want to share one last experience, because it resulted in an important lesson for me, and thought it might be helpful for some of you.
Like many of you, I have managed to accumulate over the years an array of very good equipment to support my participation in the discipline of photography as an aspect of several of my professional positions, as a hobby, and as support for other hobbies (railroad history, model railroading, amateur radio). All focal lengths except for super-telephotos and "fisheye" wide angle perspectives have been covered by fast, high-quality lenses. But like most of you, as I have gotten older, I have found that there is a necessity to add the option of serviceable, lighter-weight lenses for those all-day occasions when what starts out with me has to stay with me, or when I am going to be riding in someone else's vehicle with other folks. Unlike some, I am not yet at the point of giving up the better equipment or of completely changing formats or systems.
The process of adding these lenses has involved some searching and some researching. So far I have added a Nikkor 18-200mm DX VR and a Nikkor 18-35 f3.5/4.5 D AF EDIF, both purchased through this forum. The latter almost didn't happen because of a review which fortunately turned out not to be at all representative of the lens I purchased. That review indicated that lens would produce distortion, chromatic aberration, unfocused corners, and more than 2 f stops of vignetting in the corners. Fortunately, I went ahead with the purchase, thinking that I could at least use the lens on my DX bodies.
Purposeful testing and actual use revealed none of these shortcomings beyond a little softness in the corners, which is characteristic of most ultrawide lenses, especially zooms. What I have purchased turns out to be a completely functional and serviceable wide angle zoom lens, completely usable on both DX and FX bodies. Further checking indicated that the review was written late...after the introduction of the "G" version of the lens.
It is not possible to know at this point whether the reviewer had just picked up an old, out of whack "D" lens for his review, or whether his underlying purpose was to create dissatisfaction among owners of the "D" lens to encourage them to go out and replace them with the new version. It doesn't really matter to me. My point is that nowadays almost anyone can post almost anything for public consumption. (And yes, that includes this post.) My encouragement to all is to measure what you read and be willing to test and find out for yourself. I'm not saying that there's not a lot of worthless stuff offered for sale. Just to be sensible about what you read and believe.
Thanks to all for the knowledge you have made available through the forum and for the <mostly> interesting discussions.
Best wishes as you pursue your photographic interests.
Like many of you, I have managed to accumulate over the years an array of very good equipment to support my participation in the discipline of photography as an aspect of several of my professional positions, as a hobby, and as support for other hobbies (railroad history, model railroading, amateur radio). All focal lengths except for super-telephotos and "fisheye" wide angle perspectives have been covered by fast, high-quality lenses. But like most of you, as I have gotten older, I have found that there is a necessity to add the option of serviceable, lighter-weight lenses for those all-day occasions when what starts out with me has to stay with me, or when I am going to be riding in someone else's vehicle with other folks. Unlike some, I am not yet at the point of giving up the better equipment or of completely changing formats or systems.
The process of adding these lenses has involved some searching and some researching. So far I have added a Nikkor 18-200mm DX VR and a Nikkor 18-35 f3.5/4.5 D AF EDIF, both purchased through this forum. The latter almost didn't happen because of a review which fortunately turned out not to be at all representative of the lens I purchased. That review indicated that lens would produce distortion, chromatic aberration, unfocused corners, and more than 2 f stops of vignetting in the corners. Fortunately, I went ahead with the purchase, thinking that I could at least use the lens on my DX bodies.
Purposeful testing and actual use revealed none of these shortcomings beyond a little softness in the corners, which is characteristic of most ultrawide lenses, especially zooms. What I have purchased turns out to be a completely functional and serviceable wide angle zoom lens, completely usable on both DX and FX bodies. Further checking indicated that the review was written late...after the introduction of the "G" version of the lens.
It is not possible to know at this point whether the reviewer had just picked up an old, out of whack "D" lens for his review, or whether his underlying purpose was to create dissatisfaction among owners of the "D" lens to encourage them to go out and replace them with the new version. It doesn't really matter to me. My point is that nowadays almost anyone can post almost anything for public consumption. (And yes, that includes this post.) My encouragement to all is to measure what you read and be willing to test and find out for yourself. I'm not saying that there's not a lot of worthless stuff offered for sale. Just to be sensible about what you read and believe.
Thanks to all for the knowledge you have made available through the forum and for the <mostly> interesting discussions.
Best wishes as you pursue your photographic interests.
Oct 2, 2017 16:10:26 #
Oct 2, 2017 16:12:37 #
About lens reviews: none quote the results of optical bench tests. So nothing objective, everything subjective.
Oct 2, 2017 16:12:59 #
One has to take everything that you read with two grains of salt. Never just take one review, bias pops up everywhere.
Oct 2, 2017 16:26:31 #
John_F wrote:
About lens reviews: none quote the results of optical bench tests. So nothing objective, everything subjective.
Not exactly. Go to SLRGear.com.
Oct 3, 2017 14:25:27 #
Went there. Noted last update was March 2016. Looked at lens review section. All the makes there, did the Sony list. Noted that most just had user reviews. Checked one that had a lab review - no lab results quoted.
LoneRangeFinder wrote:
Not exactly. Go to SLRGear.com.
Oct 3, 2017 18:28:58 #
John_F wrote:
About lens reviews: none quote the results of optical bench tests. So nothing objective, everything subjective.
If you can't find optical bench results, "crowd source" - i.e., input from lots of users -reduces effect of biases {I used plural because there are several forms of bias}
Oct 3, 2017 19:18:12 #
This was a great post, well taken. And this is why I like to solicit opinions here, rather than depend solely on “professional” reviews. I like personal experience because they show how a piece of gear performs. Everyday use, to me, really tells the story.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.