Current subscribers can click on the header above to log in, if
desired. The link to renew a subscription
or to check when it expires is near the bottom of this page.
The Reid Reviews article index gives a listing of stories published to date.
For suggestions about how to get the most out of the site see our site tips.
normal business hours are 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST Monday through
(excluding holidays) and any problems with subscriptions, responses to e-mail, etc. are normally handled
during those business hours. I am, however, sometimes away for medical appointments during those hours and
appreciate your patience if you need to wait for a response to your e-mail. If subscribing, please be sure that the
full name you provide exactly matches the name on your PayPal account.
On July 2 I published a test of four different programs for converting FujiFilm RAF files.
On June 12 I updated my review of the Sigma SD Quattro H based on field testing using an external Elvid
On June 6 I published an extensive review of the BenQ SW320 which is a 4K display that renders in nearly full
AdobeRGB. This article also looks in detail at calibration as well as options for using 4K displays with older
(silver box) Mac Pros.
On May 25 I published a full review of the Fujinon XF 50/2.0 WR based on field and studio testing.
On May 11 I published my review of the Sigma SD Quattro H. This camera is especially interesting not only
because it uses a larger sensor than past Sigma Foveon cameras but also because it can now output DNG files.
On May 11 I updated my article on waist level photography with some new comments about Diane
On April 26 I published my review of the Fuji X-T2.
On April 13 I published an article that began as a field report but -- organically I think -- grew into an essay,
an interview (with the photographer Larry Fink), a field report (on working at waist level with the Fuji X-T1)
and a proposal for a new digital camera.
On April 7 I updated my recent M10 field report based on conversations with Leica about the M10's
processing of in-camera JPEGs.
On April 5 I published a new field report on the Leica M10 based on using the camera to photograph at
"Bike Week" in Daytona Beach, Florida. Included is a discussion of some interesting differences in the
M10's in-camera JPEGs (vs. DNGs processed without SDC) .
On March 31 I published an extensive field report on the Fuji X100F based on using the camera to
photograph at "Bike Week" in Daytona Beach, Florida. Included are discussions of high ISO
performance and some issues with "stuck pixels".
On March 2 I published a review of the BenQ SW2700PT, a 27" Adobe RGB monitor designed for
digital photographers. This article also includes a good deal of discussion about monitor profiling,
screen uniformity and other issues that concern monitors used for viewing and editing pictures.
On February 22 I published my review of the Fujifilm X100F.
On February 21 I revised my review of the Leica M10 to reflect its functionality with firmware 126.96.36.199.
On February 15 I published a set of 60 pictures made, with the Leica M10, at country fairs in Vermont.
On February 13 I published the results of my studio resolution tests of the Fuji XF 27/2.8 and XF 18/2.0
on the Fuji X-Pro 2. Also included in this article is a discussion of a custom homemade hood for the
On February 10 I expanded my review of the Leica SL 50/1.4 Summilux ASPH based on new conversions
I did after using a utility to remove the opcodes from certain test DNGs. This new test section may be
very interesting to photographers who, in general, are curious about the pros and cons of software based
lens corrections (for any camera). The utility I used for this testing should be able to remove opcodes from
On January 27 I published an article based on controlled side by side black and white studio tests of the
Leica M10, M (Typ 240) and M Monochrom (Typ 246). They look at tonality, resolution, noise performance
(at various ISO levels) and -- by extension -- usable dynamic range. Blended into that discussion are my
observations having worked extensively in the field with these three M cameras at low and high ISO levels.
This piece also includes a general discussion of the relationship between file noise, banding and usable
dynamic range (as they relate to almost any digital camera).
On January 22 I published an article based on controlled side by color studio tests of the Leica M10, M-240
and SL. They look at color, resolution, noise performance (at various ISO levels) and -- by extension --
usable dynamic range. Blended into that discussion are my observations having worked extensively in the field
with all three cameras at low and high ISO levels. Coming up next will be the results of studio tests
comparing the M10 and M-240 (as BW cameras) to the Leica M-246.
On January 18 I published an extensive review of the new Leica M10 as well as two articles based on using
that camera in the field. Another field article will be published soon. That will be followed, in the next
few days, by an article based on controlled side by studio tests of the Leica M10, M-240, M-246 and SL.
Those tests will look at color, resolution, noise performance (at various ISO levels), dynamic range and
the "pull" effects (if any) of using the lowest ISO settings on each camera.
On December 30 I published a field report on using the Fuji X70 to photograph Daytona Bike Week.
On December 26 I published a field report on the Ricoh GR II.
On December 14 I published my full studio comparison test of the Fuji XF 23/1.4, XF 23/2.0 and Cosina
Voigtlander 21/4.0 (on the Fuji X-Pro 2) as well as the 23 mm lens on the Fuji X100S. The results were
very interesting to me and, I hope, will be of interest not only to Fuji photographers but also to any
photographers with a keen general interest in still camera lenses.
On November 30 I published my field review of the Fuji XF 23/2.0 Aspherical. In this article I also
compare the new 23 to the Fuji XF 23/1.4 and the Fuji X100S in terms of focusing and seeing the subject.
Coming up next will be an article based on full side by side studio tests of the XF 23/2.0, XF 23/1.4 and
Fuji X100S (which uses the same lens, sensor and image processor as the X100T).
On November 22 I published a full studio comparison test of the Cosina Voigtlander 35/1.7 Ultron M,
Cosina Voigtlander 35/1.7 Ultron Aspherical LTM and Leica 35/2.0 Summicron ASPH (Pre-2016).
On November 19 I published a full studio comparison test of the Leica 28/5.6 M Summaron, Cosina
Voigtlander 28/3.5 Color Skopar, Leica 28/2.8 Elmarit ASPH (pre-2016) and Canon 28/2.8 LTM.
On October 25 I published a review of the Leica 28/5.6 M Summaron based on field testing. This article
includes almost 90 illustrations. A studio comparison article will follow in the future.
On October 18 I published an article based on side by side studio tests of the Sigma SD Quattro and
Sigma SD1 Merrill as both color and pure monochrome cameras.
On October 11 I published an article featuring about 112 pictures made in the field with the Pentax K-1.
On October 8 I published an extensive field and studio review of the Pentax K-1.
On September 28 I replaced all of the illustrations in the Leica 50/1.4 Summilux SL report with new
conversions done in Lightroom 6.5. I also added a new section discussing some of the other upcoming
SL lenses (including pictures showing their relative sizes).
On September 24 I published a "First Impressions" report on the Leica 50/1.4 Summilux SL after
working with a pre-production lens at Photokina. This article includes sample pictures made inside the
show with this newest of the SL lenses.
On September 7 I published an extensive field review of the new Sigma SD Quattro. This is Sigma's
first all-new interchangeable lens camera since their SD1 was announced in the fall of 2010.
On August 10 I published a field review of the new M-mount Cosina Voigtlander 35/1.7 Ultron.
On July 26 I published a large set of field pictures, of firemen's water polo, made using the Leica X-U.
On July 21 I published a review of the Leica X-U (Typ 113) tested on land, in water and underwater. It's a
very versatile camera. The article includes 60 field illustrations.
On July 13 I published an article based on field testing and side by side
studio testing of the Leica SL and
Leica M-240 using the Leitz Wetzlar 60/2.8 Macro-Elmarit R and Leitz Canada 90/2.0 Summicron R.
This article includes more than 80 illustrations.
On June 20 I published an article based on full studio tests of the Fuji XF 35/2.0 as compared to the
Fuji XF 35/1.4.
On June 16 I published an article based on field-testing the Fuji X-Pro 2 as a body for fast manually
pre-focused work using two compact and affordable wide-angle rangefinder lenses: the Cosina
Voigtlander 21/4.0 Skopar and 25/4.0 Skopar. This article includes about one hundred illustrations.
On May 31 I finished moving all of the Reid Reviews articles to the new site. Everything I've written is
now available in Html 5 and so is viewable on many kinds of computers and mobile devices including
various iOS phones and tablets.
May 21: With deep sadness I announce that my long-time friend and colleague Michael Reichmann died on
May 18 after a long battle with cancer. Michael and I collaborated many times and he is partly responsible
for the existence of this site. I offer my deep condolences to Michael's family and friends.
On May 19 I published a detailed article based on side by side controlled studio tests of two compact
"28 mm" (EFOV) cameras, the Fuji X70 and Ricoh GR II.
On May 13 I published a full review of the new Leica 28/2.8 Elmarit M ASPH (2016 version). It includes
side by side studio tests of both the new lens and its predecessor on the Leica M-240 and Leica SL. For
reasons that will become clear in the article, it also includes side by side resolution tests of the older
28/2.8 Elmarit Aspherical and the new 28/2.0 Summicron Aspherical when both are used on the M-240.
The field samples in the article were made with the Leica M-262.
On May 3 I published an article that is based on doing side by side studio tests of three window finder
cameras: the Fuji X-Pro 1, Fuji X-Pro 2 and Leica M (Typ 240).
On April 28 I published a short article about the new Leica M-D which, with some variations that I
discuss in the story, is a blend of the Leica M-262, which I reviewed earlier this year, and the Leica
"M Edition 60" which I reviewed in late 2014. I have not yet worked with the M-D but have a good sense
of it from the time I've spent with the M-60 and M-262.
On April 27 I published a full review of the new Leica 28/2.0 Summicron M ASPH (2016 version). It includes
side by side studio tests of both the new lens and its predecessor on the Leica M-240 and Leica SL.
Field samples in the article were made with the Leica M-262.
On April 20 I finished converting 191 more articles from the old site format to the new one.
On April 7 I published a very extensive field report based on using the Fuji X-Pro 2 and five different XF lenses
to photograph Bike Week in Daytona Beach, Florida. This article includes 150 illustrations.
On March 29 I published an article based on studio tests of two Leica M9 series cameras, one with the older
style of sensor glass cover and one with the new style being used in cameras that are repaired after developing
sensor cover glass corrosion. This may be an interesting article for anyone using a Leica CCD full-frame DRF.
On March 22 I published a new article called The Indecisive Moment which looks at using WiFi remote control
for photography at Daytona Bike Week. Many other articles are also now in progress and will be published as
they are completed.
On February 29 I published an extensive review of the Fuji X-Pro 2. In the future, I will also be doing my
standard "fruit and vegetable" studio tests comparing the file quality of the X-Pro 2, X-Pro 1 and Leica M-240
at various ISO levels. I will also be doing a great deal more field testing of the X-Pro 2 as it is one of three
cameras that I will be bringing down to Florida to photograph Daytona Bike Week.
On February 26 I published an extensive review of the Fuji X70 (including many functional comparisons with
the Ricoh GR II). In the future, I will also be doing my standard "fruit and vegetable" studio tests comparing the
file quality of the X70 and GR II at various ISO levels. I will also be doing a great deal more field testing of the
X70 as it is one of three cameras that I will soon be bringing down to Florida to photograph Daytona Bike Week.
On February 23 I published a review of the new Leica M (Typ 262).
19 we introduced a major re-design of the Reid
Reviews web site which is based on Html 5. It can be
read on computers and many mobile devices (including the Apple iPad). The visual design is all new, the site
is much faster, a search function is now available and larger images are sent to Retina and other high-resolution
3 I published a review of the Sony A7S II. I'm still
recovering from a shoulder injury but I'm getting
27 I published a very extensive review of the Sony A7R II
based on field testing and studio tests
done side by side with the Sony A7S II and Leica SL. An injury to my shoulder significantly slowed my working
pace this month and I thank readers for their patience. Things are gradually coming back up to speed.
23 I significantly updated my test of the CV Super Wide
Heliar 15/4.5 Aspherical II and
CV 21/4.0 Color Skopar P (on the Leica M and SL) after processing CV 15 II files using Adobe's "Flat Field"
plug-in for Lightroom.
22 I published an article based on side by side testing of
the Leica SL and Leica M-240 using two
ultra-wide rangefinder lenses: the CV Super Wide Heliar 15/4.5 Aspherical II and CV 21/4.0 Color Skopar P.
17 I published a set of field pictures made using the Leitz
Wetzlar 50/1.4 Summilux R and
Leitz Canada 50/2.0 Summicron R on the Leica SL.
16 I published an article based on side by side
testing of the Leica SL and Leica M-240 using two
50 mm Leica R mount lenses: the Leitz Wetzlar 50/1.4 Summilux R and Leitz Canada 50/2.0 Summicron R.
On December 1 I published a set of field pictures made using the Leica M and Cosina Voigtlander 50/2.5 Skopar.
published an article based on side by side testing of the Leica SL and
Leica M-240 using two
50 mm rangefinder lenses: the CV 50/2.5 Skopar and the CV 50/1.5 Nokton.
16 I published an article based on side by side studio
testing of the Leica SL and Leica M-240 using
two Leica SLR lenses, the Leica 35/1.4 Summilux R and the Leitz Wetzlar 28/2.8 Elmarit R. As a sister piece, I also
published an article showing three sets of field pictures made with these lenses.
5 I published an article based on side by side studio testing
of the Leica SL and Leica M-240 using
two compact 28 mm rangefinder lenses -- the Leica 28/2.8 Elmarit Aspherical and the Cosina Voigtlander 28/2.8
Color Skopar — as well as one larger fast 28 mm RF lens: the Leica 28/1.4 Summilux ASPH.
26 I published an article based on side by side
testing of the Leica SL and Leica M-240 using two
fairly compact 35 mm rangefinder lenses: the Leica 35/2.0 M Summicron ASPH and the CV 35/2.5 Skopar.
20 I published a very detailed review of the new Leica SL
with over 100 illustration. I have been
testing the camera since August and this review includes field tests as well as detailed studio tests comparing
the SL to the Leica M-246.
writer naturally brings his or her own experience and
perspective to the articles he or she writes. My
writing is heavily influenced by my experience working as a
professional photographer for more than thirty
years. I'm primarily interested in cameras and
lenses as tools for drawing, as I believe that photography
really is a branch of drawing. As the photographer Henri
Cartier-Bresson once said in an interview, "My
photography is just an instant drawing...I never quit
drawing. The camera is a way of drawing."
I'm also guided by the photographer Andre Kertesz's observation, "I see the thing, I feel the thing, I make the thing". So when I review a camera or a lens, I look primarily at how it presents the world to the photographer (via the finder), how it works as a tool in the hands, and how it draws the kind of picture we call a photograph.
"Quite simply, I think your sections on 'drawing' and and on 'sunny day lenses' are the best writing about photographic lenses that I have read - whether in magazines, journals, books or the various sources online. Few professional writers about photography ever attempt such a full consideration of the range of lens performance characteristics and the different ways in which they are photographically significant. Some discussions in photographic communities online circle around the subject, but don't achieve the focus, rigour and articulacy that you have managed here. Your article is what all writing about photographic lenses ought to be like, yet it's astonishing that next to none of it is. Interesting though Irwin Puts Leica lens book is, it would have been so much more interesting, and so much more appropriate to its subject matter, if it had been written as you have written here...I found the article incredibly useful and interesting. A great help in clarifying and firming up what I have experienced and half-understood about how different lenses work."
Simon Pulman-Jones, England
"We all owe you a vote of thanks for such a massive and thorough piece of work. What a concept-- a "lens test" that is really about the pictorial effect of how lenses draw their images. Lines per millimeter and MTF graphs have their place, but your article really gets to the heart of the matter in the way that photographers can relate to instantly."
- Peter Klein, USA
- Jim Watts, USA
Mikiro Mori, Japan
"...a very informative, even enlightening, work. It not only provides visual evidence of comparative lenses' performance, it also gets right to the most important factor of lens evaluation - how the image looks to the photographer. Long ago I stopped reading test charts of lenses since none of my clients ever published any. It is always the look of the finished image that counts."
Richard Weisgrau, USA
"I hope your tests become a benchmark for other reviewers to pay more attention to the real needs of photographers..."
- Phil Fogle, USA
- Bill Marshall, USA
ReidReviews.com accepts no advertising. A subscription is currently $39.95 per year. To get a sense of my writing style and approach you may want to read any of the freely accessible articles linked in the Read Without A Subscription section of our article index. And, of course, that index includes every article on RR so you'll be able to see just what content can be found here. As of early June, 2016, there were over 400 articles on the site, most of them quite extensive. All of them are reviews or essays.
list of current articles on Reid Reviews can be found at the
site's article index.
Policy On Advertising
many readers know, RR has always been an independent site in many senses of
that word. We hope that our readers can appreciate the value of this
approach. As a society, we are barraged with advertising (on the web,
on televison, on radio, on buses, streets, etc.). Reading Reid Reviews
is, we hope, an oasis from that. We have never accepted advertising and
we never will. We also have never taken sales commission from any
business. The Reid Reviews system is simple: we create the content and
our readers, and only our readers, pay for it.
For a humorous, but also very perceptive, take on where the line between journalism and advertising seems to be heading, for some publications at least, see this John Oliver video. I highly recommend watching it.
Article Viewer Options
The new site offers six ways to view Reid Reviews content. Click the image below to read about these.
on either image below to get a sense of what our main HTML 5 pages look
like on a 1920 by 1200 pixel monitor. Our mobile viewers are simplified
and more compact. The grey dots you see on each page are clicked to
open or close the side panels (an article list panel on the left and a
search panel on the right).
Useful tips on using the Reid Reviews site can be found here. That page is worth reading and will be updated from time to time.
The one-year subscription rate for the site is $39.95. Once your username and password have been issued, the subscription amount is not refundable. The best way to sample my work (to decide if you'd want to be a subscriber) is to read the freely accessible articles linked in the Read Without A Subscription section of our article index. Pay Pal customers can pay for their subscriptions using their Pay Pal accounts and people who are not Pay Pal customers may make a one-time credit card payment to Reid Reviews via PayPal. To make a payment by check please follow the instructions listed on the "subscribe" page which is linked below.
Reid Reviews is a high-bandwidth site full of high quality JPEGs that, intentionally, are saved with minimal compression so each picture file is quite large (given its dimensions). Preserving the thoroughness and technical picture quality of the reviews requires that the included JPEGs be only lightly compressed.
When you choose your user name and password *please* record them in a safe place for future reference. If you misplace your user name or password please click on the "Log In" link and follow the instructions there.
should automatically confirm your payment so that your
subscription begins immediately. Due to the mysteries of
PayPal, however, this sometimes does not happen for a small
percentage of new subscriptions. The most common reason
for Paypal subscription problems is entering a subscription
account name that does not exactly match the name one provides
to PayPal. If you've made a subscription payment but
do not yet have access to the site, please contact us to
manually confirm your subscription. I am a working
photographer, however, so I'm not always at the computer and
your patience is appreciated. That said, I do my best to
get accounts activated as quickly as possible once I know that
manual activation is needed.
When you subscribe, please enter your name exactly as it appears on your PayPal account (if you have one) or credit card (if paying without a Paypal account). Doing so can help to prevent problems with a subscription starting automatically. Name mismatches are the primary reason new subscriptions do not activate automatically.
Again, if the name you enter for your subscription does not match the name on your PayPal account (or credit card) there's a very good chance that your subscription won't start automatically.If you have questions, please e-mail me.
Log-In (Remember, you can also always log in by clicking the header at the top of this page).
Renew or check how long you have left on your subscription