What are some good places to get equipment reviews online?

Question

When making gear purchases, it seems sensible to get as much information as possible.

Where are good (i.e. reliably accurate and informative) places to look online for equipment reviews and discussions?

---

Answers here should focus on reviews and comparisons covering equipment other than camera bodies and lenses, because those are already covered under these questions:

• Where can I find reviews of lenses?
• Where can I find reviews of and tools for comparing cameras?

---

This is a "community wiki" post, where answers do not have individual ownership. Please post one suggestion per answer, and use the answers to rate and comment on each site.

Asked by n/a

Answer

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 showing you the most popular and highest reviewed models in each category. Overall I've found the reviews on Amazon to become somewhat dated. If a product has been available for a few years, many times the most popular reviews are from day 1. So they may be lacking up to date comparisons. But if you are aware of this, and look beyond the top rated reviews, many times you will find relevant information.

Personally I enjoy landscape and nature photography, so I like to browse the equipment section of the most recent Outdoor Photography magazine that I receive. I've found that if you are really aware of the market, some of the "new equipment" actually has been out for quite a while and the magazine editors just finally picked up on it. But if you aren't worried about being on the cutting edge(which isn't necessary) then this might turn you on to some new gift ideas or things you didn't even realize you needed.

Answered by n/a

Check more discussion of this question.

How do you reconcile generally positive user comments with negative comments in a review?

Question

My question was prompted by this DPReview review of the Nikon DX 18~200mm, wherein on page 3 the author reveals some significant sharpness and distortion issues, leading to final assessments of

Pronounced distortion across much of the range

and

Extremely soft at 135mm

These seem like major problems to my beginner eyes... yet one can find many, many satisfied owners around the internet, see B&H's store page to give one example.

These two realities - that of the carefully tested review and the cumulative experience of the masses - seem quite difficult to reconcile in this particular case.

If we assume the reviewer is competent and the lens tested is representative of the model's performance at large...

• are the reviewer's standards out of touch with all but the most serious photographers?
• or is this subtle, widespread (perhaps even subliminal) buyer's remorse performance bias based on the relatively high cost (for DX) of this lens?
• something else entirely?

Answer

• 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? It may be the only lens they own.

• the reviewer is measuring 1% distortion that most users will not see in real life images. Most wouldn't know what pincushion distortion is, or notice it unless you pointed it out. I have the lens and distortion is only noticeable to me in shots of brick walls or skyscrapers, and photoshop corrects it anyway!

• the reviewer is using test charts meant to expose any weaknesses in the lens. An owner of the lens is just taking pictures in real life situations and probably can't tell which images were taken with the 18-200mm and which were with the 50mm prime. I can't, not in terms of sharpness or distortion.

• the reviewer is judging the quality of the lens vs cost to arrive at a overall value relative to other lenses. He will no doubt think it's pricey and may judge that you could obtain a better value (either sharper or less expensive). But an owner of the lens has already paid (or overpaid) and paid the credit card bill and they're not concerned about how it compares on a test chart against another lens. They're taking pictures, and able to zoom to 200mm or out to 18mm and catch shots they wouldn't get if they had to switch lenses, or left the other lenses at home.

• I would also wager than 90% of amateur photographers don't know about or care about vignetting or chromatic aberration either. Even the trendy bokeh is probably not in most people's vocabulary :)

I bought the lens expecting it to be reasonably sharp, but mainly versatile and convenient, for a walk about lens. It's amazing that a super zooms exist IMO, much less that they are reasonably sharp. If I had experience using professional lenses, I might feel this lens was a bit soft or slow. But hey, it's basically a kit lens. Most of the people buying these are not pros and not interested in test charts.

What he says about distortion is probably true of all samples. Not sure about the softness at 135mm, I've not noticed it, and other reviewers like Thom Hogan didn't mention it. To be honest, I use the lens mainly between 18-50mm, and occasionally zoom out to 200mm to get some detail. I would rarely use 135mm.

I have done basic testing of my 18-200 at 50mm f/8 and compared to my prime 50mm at f/8. I didn't use a proper test pattern, but some newspaper. To my eye they were almost the same. The prime had a bit more contrast, and slightly sharper. If it had been a normal picture of a landscape I don't know if I could tell them apart to be honest.

As much as I love the my 85mm prime and a few others, if I could only own one lens I guess I'd stick with the 18-200mm for versatility. For that versatility it's worth the price IMO. So I'd give it a good review, but if I worked for dpreview and had all the gear to measure it against a database of other lenses, I might be more lukewarm in my assessment.

Check more discussion of this question.

Can the sharpness of the lens be evaluated with no relation to the DSLR?

Question

When I read lens reviews, they all say that one lens is sharp, another is very sharp, another one is not sharp at all, etc.

For me, it doesn't make sense to just say that a lens is sharp or not, with no information about the sensor used.

For example:

• On a 10MP Nikon D60, Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G and Nikkor 18-200mm 3.5-5.6GII are, visually, equally sharp (both at 50mm with the same aperture).

• On a 16MP Nikon D7000, the first lens is ways sharper than the second one.

Not every reviewer can afford the best full-frame DSLR with the maximum number of megapixels when testing the sharpness of the lenses for the review. On the other hand, rare reviewers who actually have the best camera will write the reviews which may be misleading for most photographers: for example someone who has only Nikon D60 with a Nikkor 18-200mm 3.5-5.6GII and would buy a Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G in order to get sharper images (just for that) will do a mistake.

Can the sharpness of the lens be evaluated with no relation to the DSLR? How the sharpness must be interpreted in the reviews, when the camera model is not mentioned?

Answer

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 simplistic, however.

Any real-world system's quality is a factor of its components. A lens has an intrinsic quality in the abstract, as does the sensor, and any other components that may be involved in the process of capturing a photograph (say an extender.) The resolution of the final photograph is a product of ALL the components of the system together, and the lowest common denominator is going to affect the IQ of that image. If the lens outresolves the sensor, the the sensor is probably going to determine the quality of the image. If the sensor outresolves the lens, then the lens is probably going to determine the quality of the image. Of the two are capable of resolving about the same detail, then both factors probably affect quality just as much as the other.

Now, its important to understand the quality of all components individually rather than as a combined whole. Why? Because a single lens may be used on multiple cameras, or a single camera may be used with multiple lenses. The quality of a lens is constant regardless of what camera body it is used on, even if one body has a higher resolution sensor than the other. Similarly, the quality of a camera sensor is the same regardless of what lens its used with. If you only knew the quality of a lens when used on the D7000, you would never know how it might fare when used with a D90, or a D3x. However, knowing the quality of the lens itself without context, you can compute how it might fare on any one of those three cameras.

A key factor in determining the quality of a system is its MTF, or modulation transfer function. An MTF is a way of computing the contrast of a lens or an imaging medium when imaging pairs of white and black lines of a specific thickness, or of progressively finer spacing. The MTF of a lens tells you how much resolution can be resolved starting at its center and progressing through the edge of the lens (most lenses do not resolve perfect detail, and resolve more detail in the center than at the edges.) A useful article that explains resolution, lenses, and sensors can be found at Luminous Landscapes Resolution article. Its rather technical, but explains the situation pretty well. If you are not afraid of math and want to know exactly how MTF describes resolution, you can read Norman Koren's Understanding Image Sharpness (beware, very technical.)

Check more discussion of this question.

How important are in-depth reviews when selecting a compact camera?

Question

I'm going to buy a super-zoom compact camera for my travels and I'm reading a lot of reviews to find which one best suites my needs.

I though that a good camera should result good in all reviews, but this is not: for one review a camera gives good pictures, for another not; a review highlights some cons (e.g. slow operation), which are not even mentioned by another...

So, here is the question: as far as a not-professional cameras are concerned, can we say that nowadays all cameras are good enough to a satisfy an enthusiast photographer (and so, reviews can only point out minor issues) or should I take into account those "pixel-level" reviews?

Answer

No, I do not think that cameras are 'good enough' for an enthusiast photographer that they should simply assume any one will satisfy their needs OR that a buyer should take the manufacture's word for it.

An enthusiast understands features and has a sense of what features are most important to him or her. Knowing which camera truly provides those features is important. For example, most cameras state they offer high-ISO, but often get there with different methods, many leading to significant noise, or shutter speed trade-offs. Camera reviews are essential to understanding these trade-offs.

Each camera provides trade-offs, and remember that pricing has little to do with cost, and everything to do with image. In other words, cameras are priced to place them in a category more than to reflect the cost of manufacture. A Canon 60D does not likely cost much more than a Canon 1000D, but is priced higher to place it in the enthusiast, or semi-pro category.

I think comparing ACROSS reviews is difficult at best, and misleading at worst. Because each review 'site' uses different criteria and values different things in cameras, trying to garner a consensus from several sites will only end in confusion and frustration.

Several sites have a defined evaluation process and method and repeat this for each review. These sites have significant consistency, and allow direct comparison of one camera to the other. Sites such as DPReview.com, imaging-resource.com, Steve's DigiCam are good, established sites.

Check more discussion of this question.

What web-based expert resources for Nikon are similar to The Digital Picture for Canon?

Question

I've followed Canon photo products for years and I can't go past this great expert resource on Canon cameras, lenses and few other accessories photographer should know about and read before buying anything new.

I used Canon non-digital SLR for years, and never really bothered to buy myself a digital version. But I decided to do so this spring.

The thing is that I can buy second hand Nikon DSLR. I know the owner so I know that camera is tip top and not much used. But I'm hesitant on Nikon lenses. Which ones provide good value for the money etc.

That's why I'm looking for similar web expert resources but focused on Nikon products.

Answer

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.

Check more discussion of this question.

Are equipment reviews from websites like kenrockwell.com and bythom.com reliable?

Question

I know that nothing helps more when buying a lens to actually test it out yourself, but in my case anyway I feel it's good to know many people's experiences. Kenrockwell is a website that I run into a lot when trying to get info on a lens. When I google a model it's usually one of the first results. The problem is, any time I or anyone else brings up KenRockwell at freenode's #photogeeks (among other places) they lambast it simply because it is from KenRockwell.

In other news, I'm thinking of getting a cheap mild telephoto prime (outside of my zoom lens budget (c;) so I've been researching the Nikkor 85mm 1.8 D fairly extensively. After having handled it myself, I am fairly certain it's the one I'm going to buy. Let's see what Ken Rockwell says about it:

He gives some remarks on OOF elements in the performance section. (I won't paste it here as I think he says he doesn't want his stuff copied anywhere)

Given, bokeh is not as good in the 85mm 1.8 as it is in the 1.4 but from what little I've used the lens (and seen from photos taken with it on like flickr and stuff), I wouldn't call it 'fairly poor'. He gives a pretty specific criticism on halos for not having used the lens much, but I think that is kind of a nitpick on my part.

One of the big things #photogeeks complains about is the little blurb in the About section that says that he adds satire and fiction to the site.

I notice many websites of this sort (Kenrockwell, ByThom [although Mr. Hogan doesn't review lenses that he doesn't claim to have used]) don't have too many sample pictures and the ones they do have are usually heavily scaled. Kenrockwell's gallery's pictures aren't even 640x480.

Are there good reasons to trust massive single-user for-profit photography websites like KenRockwell.com?

If you have not noticed yet, this rant is pretty biased. I apologize. This is what the people at #photogeeks have shown me. I'm more than open for someone to show me otherwise.

Edit: Perhaps I should not have dragged Mr. Hogan into this question as his writings do indicate that he has much more experience with the equipment than Mr. Rockwell. I am no photography expert but his reviews on the lenses I own fit the bill exactly. As many of you have mentioned, (and as is evident in reading their sites) Mr. Rockwell and Mr. Hogan have totally different review methods.

The reason I thought to include Mr. Hogan is because both he and Mr. Rockwell are big photography reviewers who make a lot of money from their websites. That doesn't make them bad reviewers. I just feel that even on something as petty as product reviews you can fall into a trap of getting biased towards a particular reviewer's opinions. I know it happened to me when I was first looking to buy. I though Mr. Rockwell was the bomb dot com because of the heaps of praise he threw on the really cheap lenses within my budget while I looked with disdain at more analytic reviewers' opinions (read: ByThom) on the same lenses. I guess that is because the more real reviews revealed the lens's real shortcomings. People will see what they want to see.

It is evident to me now that Mr. Hogans reviews carry more weight in the real world but I can see how bias can go both ways. I guess there really is nothing better than trying the lens out for yourself. As I have mentioned I have done above, just never with big $1000+ investment lenses.

That brings me back to my question: On an absolute scale how much can you trust these review sites?

P.S. Thank you for reading my rant! If you have gotten this far you are the winner (c:

Answer

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's got great bokeh -- whatever. To the extent you start to see these attributes come up time and again for a given piece of equipment, you can start to be pretty sure there's something real there. If you do this a few times, you'll also start to have a good frame of reference for how reliable any given source of information is; so in the future, you'll have a pretty good feel for whether you want to start with Ken Rockwell, or whether you'd be better off starting with someone like DPReview.

The idea here is that any given review on even the most trusted site could be off, so don't rely on a single source of information unless it's a purchase you're comfortable taking a gamble on.

Check more discussion of this question.

Has anyone any experience of the Flipbac Camera Grips?

Question

I was looking at Flipbac Grips for my Canon S90. Was wondering if anyone had any comments to share about them. Yes I'd prefer Richard Franeic's custom-machined aluminium version but I'm too miserly. Will the G1 or G2 do the job at least competently?

Thanks.

Answer

I have used both the Flipbac Grip 2 and the RF grip (on my previous S90). The RF grip is nice but the Flipbac Grip is no compromise. I feel it is much better value for money. It fit my S95 perfectly. On a recent weekend trip with my wife it was invaluable. Easy one hand holding. It feels good and looks good. I don't own my camera long enough to justify the $45 on the RF grip.No regrets.

s95 shooter Western Australia

Check more discussion of this question.

Can the Tokina AT-X 165 PRO DX AF 16-50mm f/2.8 actually be found new, and how does it compare to the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM?

Question

I am having difficulties finding in-depth (Canon mount) reviews and comparisons for the Tokina AT-X 165 PRO DX AF 16-50mm f/2.8 lens. This lens is currently not sold on Adorama and B&H says that is has been discontinued by the manufacturer. In fact many other sites state it is currently unavailable. However, on the Tokina site it is called a "new" lens. I am confused.

In any case, suppose I could get this lens somewhere for roughly $550 - $600 USD, how does it compare with the $1100 - $1200 Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM? Does anyone have hands on experience with this lens?

Also, does anyone know of any reputable place that actually offers this lens?

Answer

Lenstip has quite a complete review of the lens, they compare the canon to the nikon mount, even with some history: they mention how it was postponed after tokina realized how good the tamron was.

Tokina lenses can be hard to find, resellers only have the most recent ones available. Maybe you can find one in the second-hand market, that's how I found my Tokina 50-135 Canon mount not so long ago: clean, never unpacked, with a small premium.

In Japan though they seem to be well distributed, maybe you can find a shop there that will ship it to you.

Check more discussion of this question.

Where can I find reviews of and tools for comparing cameras?

Question

We all buy a new digicam/DSLR every now and then.

So what web sites do you use to get more information about cameras and compare them?
Where do you look for technical information, camera reviews, recommendations, comparison tables, and so on?

(There isn't one right answer for this, so this is a Community Wiki question. Please put one website recommendation per answer - if you know more websites, just write one answer for each one.)

Answer

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.

Check more discussion of this question.