IMHO, giving cameras in exchange for content is genius. Marketing has changed and to have your product in front of people on an ongoing basis is ideal for a camera company. I expect more companies to do this. It’s been in other types of products for years, especially DJI. Putting a full page add in a magazine doesn’t cut it in 2026. But if you look at how many actually keep them and use them regularly you’ll see that they actually do like the gear, or not.
You may not like it but Hasselblad’s got lots more people considering the brand than ever. Going forward more brands will do this.
It certainly does affect how i perceive a youtuber but I also don’t write them off. All these channels have bias, free gear or not. I need to know that bias and adjust expectations accordingly. But as always, do your own research and come to your own conclusions. For me the only unbiased reviewer was Gerald Undone and he’s over long form reviews. But sometimes I get a small nugget of useful from these other reviewers.
Ambassadors don’t really review cameras. They introduce them. They’re also generally better photographers than the YouTube crowd. I am lucky enough to know a few and without exception they’re great people and generous with their time and knowledge. And almost all sensational photographers. Their responsibility is to give critical feedback to the company’s they represent. Not you. But if you actually sit down over a coffee they do tell you what they like and don’t. Just don’t think they’re going to burn a professional relationship on YouTube. Again if you know that going in and adjust you can get some very useful information. Generally they get access much earlier and longer than the likes of Peta Pixel and Kai Wong.
For me the most important thing is to handle the damn gear. Specs and reviews don’t always tell the whole story. My favourite lenses aren’t always the ones with the most resolving power and my favourite cameras aren’t the ones with the fastest, whatever. They’re the ones I want to use every day. The ones I get the look I want and the performance I need, which mostly isn’t the fastest. A great spec sheet that doesn’t fit my hand well makes no sense to me. Ultra sharp lenses can be boring or aggressive.
If you can understand a reviewers bias them you can adjust their comments you your needs. Certainly don’t buy stuff because it suits someone else.
Lens reviews - images always count most with YT 'reviews'. I've found very few produce work that lies far from the mainstream. And that makes sense because they know their audiences and their tastes, environments and scope. It's a two way street.
I have a rule for them: if you do not lead off with 15-20 thoughtful and well-presented images, you are out. So many of them also offer the same boilerplate upfront; (makers name) sent me this lens but the review is all my opinions, they did not get to see it before publishing.' But the producer didn't have to do so to know what the gist will be.
'this portfolio puts most people on here's to shame'
Why would you think people here post their best work?
flash wrote:
IMHO, giving cameras in exchange for content is genius. Marketing has changed and to have your product in front of people on an ongoing basis is ideal for a camera company. I expect more companies to do this. It’s been in other types of products for years, especially DJI. Putting a full page add in a magazine doesn’t cut it in 2026. But if you look at how many actually keep them and use them regularly you’ll see that they actually do like the gear, or not.
You may not like it but Hasselblad’s got lots more people considering the brand than ever. Going forward more brands will do this.
It certainly does affect how i perceive a youtuber but I also don’t write them off. All these channels have bias, free gear or not. I need to know that bias and adjust expectations accordingly. But as always, do your own research and come to your own conclusions. For me the only unbiased reviewer was Gerald Undone and he’s over long form reviews. But sometimes I get a small nugget of useful from these other reviewers.
Ambassadors don’t really review cameras. They introduce them. They’re also generally better photographers than the YouTube crowd. I am lucky enough to know a few and without exception they’re great people and generous with their time and knowledge. And almost all sensational photographers. Their responsibility is to give critical feedback to the company’s they represent. Not you. But if you actually sit down over a coffee they do tell you what they like and don’t. Just don’t think they’re going to burn a professional relationship on YouTube. Again if you know that going in and adjust you can get some very useful information. Generally they get access much earlier and longer than the likes of Peta Pixel and Kai Wong.
For me the most important thing is to handle the damn gear. Specs and reviews don’t always tell the whole story. My favourite lenses aren’t always the ones with the most resolving power and my favourite cameras aren’t the ones with the fastest, whatever. They’re the ones I want to use every day. The ones I get the look I want and the performance I need, which mostly isn’t the fastest. A great spec sheet that doesn’t fit my hand well makes no sense to me. Ultra sharp lenses can be boring or aggressive.
If you can understand a reviewers bias them you can adjust their comments you your needs. Certainly don’t buy stuff because it suits someone else.
+1 ... specs are specs. A person's interface with it can be very preferential or yuck ... that's a personal thing. It can range from anything like, grip and balance, to shutter release position, to size / weight, et al.
Bottom line, if you like it ... shoot the snot out of it. If you don't like it ... find one that you do.
stgrove wrote:
What is the point in getting a Leica SL3-P instead of a Lumix S1Rii for one third the Leica price?
Only thing that I can tell so far ... is the interface of focusing algorithm's for Leica body > Leica lens (so I've read) vs. Leica body with generic focusing algorithm on non-Leica lenses vs. non-Leica bodies with Leica lenses focusing algorithm, not optimized for the body / lens software relationship.
Again, this ^ is only what I've read about. Other than that, the ubiquitous things about IP rating, build quality, size, menu, shape of grip, button layout consistency to other Leica products, etc. Mostly just those things that are "signature" to Leica are what I've been able to discern.
I will say that the navigation approach between AF modes is a bit different, but whether that is worth the $$$ diff is tbd / subjective / personal. That said, I'll be strongly watching for this very question to be answered (for my interests). Also, things like how they each play with adapted M lenses, can be a differentiator.
On the surface, it is easy to call out the $$$ diff ... but, with Leica ... I'm always wondering about the cumulative effects of "the little things", as it pertains to joy of use. Sometimes that's difficult to value.
So ... yeah, I'll be noodling over that very question as we learn more about the SL3-P. For now ... yup ... 1/3 the $$$ is in my bag. 2/3 $$$ is in my wallet.
philip_pj wrote:
Lens reviews - images always count most with YT 'reviews'. I've found very few produce work that lies far from the mainstream. And that makes sense because they know their audiences and their tastes, environments and scope. It's a two way street.
I have a rule for them: if you do not lead off with 15-20 thoughtful and well-presented images, you are out. So many of them also offer the same boilerplate upfront; (makers name) sent me this lens but the review is all my opinions, they did not get to see it before publishing.' But the producer didn't have to do so to know what the gist will be.
'this portfolio puts most people on here's to shame' Why would you think people here post their best work?...Show more →
Why would one lead with anything but? Are you of the mind that FM users are creating threads to share work that they don't think is good? Or they're just hiding the work they're truly proud of because...reasons?
Here's what I think: I think it's lame to frequent a photography forum, critique the work of others, and not have links to your own work available to see. I think it's even weirder if you do frequent a photography forum, and only share your mid-tier work. That's just bizarre.
I agree with the rest of your post. I can't stand a video that doesn't lead with images. I'm not here to see a talking head, show what you've created with the gear or GTFO.
flash wrote:
IMHO, giving cameras in exchange for content is genius. Marketing has changed and to have your product in front of people on an ongoing basis is ideal for a camera company. I expect more companies to do this. It’s been in other types of products for years, especially DJI. Putting a full page add in a magazine doesn’t cut it in 2026. But if you look at how many actually keep them and use them regularly you’ll see that they actually do like the gear, or not.
You may not like it but Hasselblad’s got lots more people considering the brand than ever. Going forward more brands will do this.
It certainly does affect how i perceive a youtuber but I also don’t write them off. All these channels have bias, free gear or not. I need to know that bias and adjust expectations accordingly. But as always, do your own research and come to your own conclusions. For me the only unbiased reviewer was Gerald Undone and he’s over long form reviews. But sometimes I get a small nugget of useful from these other reviewers.
Ambassadors don’t really review cameras. They introduce them. They’re also generally better photographers than the YouTube crowd. I am lucky enough to know a few and without exception they’re great people and generous with their time and knowledge. And almost all sensational photographers. Their responsibility is to give critical feedback to the company’s they represent. Not you. But if you actually sit down over a coffee they do tell you what they like and don’t. Just don’t think they’re going to burn a professional relationship on YouTube. Again if you know that going in and adjust you can get some very useful information. Generally they get access much earlier and longer than the likes of Peta Pixel and Kai Wong.
For me the most important thing is to handle the damn gear. Specs and reviews don’t always tell the whole story. My favourite lenses aren’t always the ones with the most resolving power and my favourite cameras aren’t the ones with the fastest, whatever. They’re the ones I want to use every day. The ones I get the look I want and the performance I need, which mostly isn’t the fastest. A great spec sheet that doesn’t fit my hand well makes no sense to me. Ultra sharp lenses can be boring or aggressive.
If you can understand a reviewers bias them you can adjust their comments you your needs. Certainly don’t buy stuff because it suits someone else.
Gordon,
I agree with much of what you are saying, but I still can't help feel bitter about companies flying people for free vacations, giving away 10K (plus) in gear, so that their hand-picked reviewer can promote the product in a 10 to 20 minute video. To be clear, I felt the same way when Outdoor Photography or Peterson Photography used to "review" gear. The reviews were always disingenuous and biased in a way that the strengths were over-emphasized and the weaknesses were given a passing glance or ignored.
With respect to the SL3-P, there were two people who did "wildlife" reviews. One did a written review and the other was on YouTube. Neither of these people are what I'd consider dedicated wildlife photographers, and the presentation of their images did more of a disservice to Leica than a service. The rush for a YouTube reviewer to publish their video first and ahead of the curve leads to shoddy work. As you know, in the case of wildlife and other types of nature photography, light is everything followed by photographable encounters with potential subjects. Because the YouTube / Review Crowd are motivated by quick hits and views, we rarely get to see the capabilities of new gear until it's been on the market for months. At which point the hype has died down. I think if manufacturers are going to persist with this "give-away" model, they need to be more selective about the reviewers capabilities and commitments instead of their "on air" personalities...
I don't think there's anything wrong with giving away gear for promo...unless you're trying to be a luxury brand. I'd argue Hasselblad is not anymore, and maybe never was. Leica is positioned as the "Rolex," of camera companies, and Rolex would definitely never give away their crown jewel for promo. Hell, they don't even let would be buyers buy their best watches sometimes without buying others first. Very Ferrari of them.
stgrove wrote:
What is the point in getting a Leica SL3-P instead of a Lumix S1Rii for one third the Leica price?
I’ll let you know, now that I have both. But most likely one puts features over user experience and one puts user experience over features. The usual with Leica.
The seeping, seething bitterness that someone was sent something for free when you (the royal you) wasn’t is such a dumb vibe that is permeating every photography discussion medium.
Do something of value for the photographic community, work to build a brand relationship, share some knowledge…ANYTHING.
The average complainer has no clue about what it takes to make a compelling, tight 10 min video, let alone a 45-60 minute long form educational video. All content you happily watch FOR FREE.
I’m still learning my way around it, but it has given me a totally new perspective on the matter.
A question for anyone that has an SL3-P. I thought all the SL3 were the same size but according to specs I've found the SL3-P is bigger (biggest difference is the width). For anyone that has one or has held one, is that correct?
bcaslis wrote:
A question for anyone that has an SL3-P. I thought all the SL3 were the same size but according to specs I've found the SL3-P is bigger (biggest difference is the width). For anyone that has one or has held one, is that correct?
Curious to see the specs you are referring / source.
The only way I would think this would be the case, is if they reverted to the SL2 body, and used it for the SL3-P. But, even that would be an unexpected departure from using the same body as the SL3 / SL3-S.
RoamingScott wrote:
The seeping, seething bitterness that someone was sent something for free when you (the royal you) wasn’t is such a dumb vibe that is permeating every photography discussion medium.
Do something of value for the photographic community, work to build a brand relationship, share some knowledge…ANYTHING.
The average complainer has no clue about what it takes to make a compelling, tight 10 min video, let alone a 45-60 minute long form educational video. All content you happily watch FOR FREE.
I’m still learning my way around it, but it has given me a totally new perspective on the matter.
Just let me know the day Hasselblad gives you a free camera and lens so I can get out my Scott voodoo doll and start slowly putting pins through it.
highdesertmesa wrote:
Just let me know the day Hasselblad gives you a free camera and lens so I can get out my Scott voodoo doll and start slowly putting pins through it.
Should be any day now given the 40mm shoot out deep dive he just put out. The man is cooking!
DON'T FORGET ABOUT US ON YOUR WAY TO THE TOP, SCOTT!
On topic:
Looking forward to more hands on feedback about the SL3-P. My G.A.S knows no bounds.
Don’t worry, I threw my own 20k at them like an idiot.
highdesertmesa wrote:
Just let me know the day Hasselblad gives you a free camera and lens so I can get out my Scott voodoo doll and start slowly putting pins through it.
