|
Note:
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 can be found here.
The Reid Reviews article index can be found here.
What's New:
Please Note: I will be travelling and photographing from February 18 - 27 and will not always have access to e-mail.
When possible, I will be replying to e-mail in the morning and late evening during this time period.
Reid
Reviews' normal business hours
are 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST Monday through Friday (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 February 12 I published a review of the Cosina Voigtlander 15 - 35 Zoom Finder.
On February 9 I published a very extensive review of five 21 mm lenses tested on the Leica M9. Based on nearly
three months of studio and field testing this review covers a lot of ground in detail. It's not light reading, by any
stretch of the imagination, but my hope is that it will be a useful reference for photographers interested in these
lenses. The tested lenses are the Leica 21/2.8 Elmarit ASPH, Leica 21/3.4 Super Elmar ASPH, Voigtlander
21/4.0 Color Skopar, Zeiss 21/2.8 Biogon and Zeiss 21/4.5 C-Biogon.
On January 18 I published studio lens tests of the Zeiss 21/4.5 C-Biogon on the the Sony NEX 5n and the
Ricoh GXR Mount A12. These new sections can be found near the end of the article called "EFCs for RF Lenses".
On January 12 I published studio lens tests of the Leica 21/3.4 Super Elmar on the the Sony NEX 5n and the
Ricoh GXR Mount A12. These new sections can be found near the end of the article called "EFCs for RF Lenses".
On January 9 I published my first set of studio lens tests with the the Sony NEX 5n and the Ricoh GXR Mount A12.
The test lens was the Cosina Voigtlander 15/4.5. These are the first controlled comparison tests I've done with
these two cameras and they reveal some very interesting differences in the ways each camera renders on center
and in the outer zones. These new sections are almost an article unto themselves but they can be found near the end
of the article called "EFCs for RF Lenses".
On December 19 I published "Part One" of an extensive article that looks at how well two electronic finder cameras
(the Sony NEX 5n and the Ricoh GXR Mount A12) work as bodies for rangefinder camera lenses (both M and
LTM mount). It also looks at various issues that I think are important to consider if one wants to use
EFCs with RF lenses. Other new sections will follow. In particular, I'll look at controlled studio tests that pair both
of these EFCs with five "challenging" wide-angle rangefinder camera lenses.
On November 21 I published an extensive field review of the new Fuji X10 using RAW files converted in a beta
version of Adobe Lightroom. This is a very interesting little camera and this article, with nearly 70 illustrations, looks
at it in detail.
On November 13 I published a "first impressions" field review of the new Leica 21/3.4 Super-Elmar.
On November 3 I published an extensive field review of the Ricoh GR IV. With a small sensor and a fixed prime
lens - with an EFOV of about 28 mm - this is a specialized camera. But I think it may be the smallest digital
camera on the market that a serious photographer might take seriously. This version of the now venerable GR
series includes some significant improvements that make this one of the best small sensor cameras I've tested
to date. The review also includes some sections written by my sixteen year old daughter who comments not
only on the cameras tested (the GR IV and a Sigma DP1x) but also on some of the challenges involved in
photographing people in public while working with a wide-angle lens.
On October 21 I published a very extensive review of six medium-fast 50 mm rangefinder lenses tested on the
Leica M9. It's the result of field and studio testing that I've been doing since this summer. The article includes well
over 120 illustrations and will take some time to read and consider. But I hope it is worth it.
On September 22 I published an article about the Tunbridge World's Fair, fast photography and the Ricoh GXR
Mount A-12 (compared, in practical use, to the Leica M9).
On September 12 I published photos and an essay about Saxtons River, Vermont after Tropical Storm Irene.
On September 7 I updated my "rolling review" of the Ricoh "GXR Mount A12" with additional text and example
pictures made using the Leica 50/2.0 Summicron.
On August 31 I published the first part of my "rolling review" of the Ricoh "GXR Mount A12" - a new
and very interesting module that brings Leica M mount compatibility to the Ricoh GXR.
On July 17 I published an in-depth initial review of the Sigma SD1 which includes extensive file quality
comparisons of this new camera with the Leica M9 and Canon 5D.
On July 7 I published an article based on field testing the Fuji X100 with firmware 1.10 on the streets of
New York City. I strongly recommend this article to subscribers who are interested in the X100.
On June 24 I expanded my article about using the X100 to photograph at The Strolling of The Heifers
with some initial comments on Fuji's new firmware 1.10.
On June 21 I published an article about the new Leica M9-P and the new Leica 21/3.4 Super Elmar.
On June 17 I expanded my review of fast 28 mm lenses on the Leica M9. There are new sections that look
at the resolution performance of a second 28/2.0 Summicron ASPH lens sample as well as the vignetting and
cyan drift performance of the M9 (with that lens) when the camera is using firmware 1.162. I strongly recommend
this article to photographers who are interested in 28 mm rangefinder lenses and/or Leica's new M9 firmware.
On June 13 I published an article about using the X100 to photograph at a Vermont event called
The Strolling of The Heifers.
On June 1 I published a review of the Sigma DP2s that looks particularly at the nature and quality of its - Foveon
sensor - output.
On May 7 I published a comprehensive review of three fast 28 mm lenses on the Leica M9. This article is the result
of studio testing as well as several months testing in the field.
On May 4 I published what could be considered "Part II" of my Fuji X100 review. It includes, among many other things,
a detailed look at the comparative quality of files from the X100, Leica X1, Sigma DP2s and Leica M8.2.
On April 27 - 30 I published updates to my review of the Fuji X100 that cover topics such as shutter lag and speed
in RAW mode. I also discuss a strange problem with exposure consistency that I saw in my test camera and
identify a possible source for that problem.
On April 17 I published a very extensive "rolling review" of the Fuji X100 with over 70 illustrations. As such, it is
certainly not light reading. But I hope that it will be very useful to photographers who are curious about this new
camera and who want to understand it in depth. This first installment is primarily based on field testing I've done
with the X100 in various conditions and with various subjects. Over the next week I will be adding new sections
to the review that compare the output of the X100, at various ISO levels, with output from three competing cameras.
On March 27 I published a review of new beta-level firmware for the Leica X1. The production level version of this
firmware will be available soon.
On February 2 I published new sections in my review of the Pentax K5 that look at file quality, ISO noise, etc. The
review is now complete.
On January 25 I published an extensive review of the Pentax 40/2.8 Limited and Pentax 35/2.8 Macro Limited.
On January 13 I published an extensive "rolling review" of the Pentax K5. I think this camera deserves the attention
of serious photographers, especially those who may be looking for a quiet, compact and weather-sealed SLR
alternative to a medium-sensor EVF camera.
Every 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 twenty-five years. I'm primarily interested in cameras and lenses as tools for drawing, as I believe that photography really is a branch of drawing. I'm 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
"I read your substantial paper with great interest. I am an amateur enthusiast in photography and optics. Your concept first surprised me, because I have had an impression that few photographers in North America and possibly in Europe like to discuss lens characters as expression tools. Among Japanese photographers, amateurs and professionals alike, there is a long tradition of interest or even addiction in appreciating various image characters of optics. For instance, Shoji Ohtake, one of the most influential photographers in Japan writes a regular column titled Lens Physiognomy for a major camera journal. He says that for each of his representation he selects the right lens from his huge collection. I was impressed by your pragmatic and well-organised approach in reviewing the lenses. Your observation is keen and relevant to essential aspects of photographic imagery. Your rhetoric is straight, logical, and free from jargon. These are rarely met in review papers on similar tests, which tend to be too technical or too subjective. I should also tell you that I myself have evaluated lenses mostly in B&W for the same reason as in your reviews. Few people have understood me. All in all, it is a marvelous paper. My applause." - 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 $32.95 per year. To get an idea of whether or not my writing will be useful to you, I'd recommend reading some of my existing reviews on Luminous-Landscape and Imaging Resource which are linked in the site's article index. Together, they can provide you with a good sense of how I approach reviewing photographic tools.
A list of current articles on Reid Reviews can be found at the site's table of contents.
The
one-year subscription rate for the site is $32.95. Once your
username and password have been issued, the subscription amount is not
refundable. The best way to sample my reviews (to
decide if you'd want to be a subscriber) is to read my freely
available Luminous-Landscape and Imaging
Resource reviews linked above. 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.
Other resources: Open
Photography Forums |
