elbeasto wrote:
Does he do any articles on photography rather than gear?
Like his photos are pretty nice, I'd be more inclined to read about how he shoots rather than what he thinks about the latest Canikon.
Yes, I realise he's a Zeiss and Leica aficionado as well...
In my opinion, Lloyd doesn't "do" photography... he does "tests".
The trick with Lloyd is to subscribe only during periods when a lot of new equipment is coming onto the market; this year has been a good time, with significant new stuff from Voigtlander, Fujifilm, Sony, Nikon, Leica, and Zeiss.
Lloyd seems to be getting increasingly grouchy, irritable, and critical of the manufacturers and their designs.
Good...that's what he's paid for.
DigMeTX wrote:
Last time I was at Lloyd's site I had the thought that it was looking more and more like KR's site.
brad
I’m not a Diglloyd subscriber so perhaps I’m wrong, but I’ve yet to see where he demonstrates Ken’s trademark style, which is the sort of crap we expect from salesmen:
- Proclaiming every other product “the world’s best” something-or-other
- Making his case by presenting information out of context
- Contradicting himself at a frequent rate
- “Reviewing” a lens without sharing images taken with it, perhaps not even using it
- Treading lightly in terms of genuine, objective criticism
- Expressing a preference of questionable taste for a garishly saturated color palette
Frank_Maiello wrote:
I’m not a Diglloyd subscriber so perhaps I’m wrong, but I’ve yet to see where he demonstrates Ken’s trademark style, which is the sort of crap we expect from salesmen:
- Proclaiming every other product “the world’s best” something-or-other
- Making his case by presenting information out of context
- Contradicting himself at a frequent rate
- “Reviewing” a lens without sharing images taken with it, perhaps not even using it
- Treading lightly in terms of genuine, objective criticism
- Expressing a preference of questionable taste for a garishly saturated color palette
M635_Guy wrote:
Huh? Not sure I understand that last part.
(and not trying to be the grammar/spelling police, but it is "well-heeled")
Maybe the reference was to the formerly ill whose Ccadillac level health insurance plans allow them to see actual doctors?
Zebrabot wrote:
they are just that. words on paper. If it's not some law you're subject to, that's all it is.
Nobody claimed we weren't free to make choices, but there are significant qualitative differences among reviewers' individual approaches worthy of consideration when making that choice. It's not an abstract metaphysical issue.
Frank_Maiello wrote:
I’m not a Diglloyd subscriber so perhaps I’m wrong, but I’ve yet to see where he demonstrates Ken’s trademark style, which is the sort of crap we expect from salesmen:
- Proclaiming every other product “the world’s best” something-or-other
- Making his case by presenting information out of context
- Contradicting himself at a frequent rate
- “Reviewing” a lens without sharing images taken with it, perhaps not even using it
- Treading lightly in terms of genuine, objective criticism
- Expressing a preference of questionable taste for a garishly saturated color palette
Easy, my friend. I didn't say that he's like KR, that he takes similar pictures to KR or that he does anything else like anyone else. I just said that last time I was there I felt like it was looking more like KR's site. It was just a thought that occurred to me at the time I was looking at it, not an attempt to disparage anyone (KR and LC included). I think it was the myriad of sponsored links all down one side of the page and the number of mentions for ways you can help him make money (by buying his things or paying for sponsored content in this case). That's not meant to be this or that.. it just is what it is.
Ok Brad, but KR often deserves disparaging comments for deliberately misleading readers (whether to keep them alert and thinking about what they read or just because he can).
Lloyd's stuff is accurate as far as I can tell but as with his Mac Performance Guide his target audience are those who want the best gear and/or to get the best out of whatever gear they have. Some of his advice and recommendations would be wasted on people who won't ever post process images and won't ever use a tripod and who think that a TV makes a great photo display or who only ever want 6"x4" prints - but he doesn't disguise that fact.
Regarding the D600 he offers conclusions that show it to be pretty good overall but he also gives specific reasons why it won't suit him as well as the D800E does - such as the non-sensor-related things like ergonomics.
DigMeTX wrote:
Easy, my friend. I didn't say that he's like KR, that he takes similar pictures to KR or that he does anything else like anyone else. I just said that last time I was there I felt like it was looking more like KR's site. It was just a thought that occurred to me at the time I was looking at it, not an attempt to disparage anyone (KR and LC included). I think it was the myriad of sponsored links all down one side of the page and the number of mentions for ways you can help him make money (by buying his things or paying for sponsored content in this case). That's not meant to be this or that.. it just is what it is.
Point taken, thanks. It’s just that one of those guys trips my well-tuned bullshit detector and the other one doesn’t. The problem in a nation where all legal means of earning(?) money is considered entrepreneurship, is that we must view every profiteer with a suspicious eye.
