Re: Nikon Zf as a platform for adapted/native manual focus lenses
We should be communicating our images to those with an expectation of similar equipment, post-processing ability (I don't call a set of simple steps undertaken in now fully mature s/ware a 'skill') and viewing devices. It's still a great shock to see so few people prepared to do so, in 2023.
To not adorn a review with, not just snapshots of one's liking, but typical usage of the lens in question, is more than disrespecful. It's condescending, poor business practice, poor reputation management, and just makes you look silly and untrustworthy.
It's not hard, is it? You test a lens, provide at least ten images illustrating your take on the lens. Ideally, different apertures, different focal distances, different subject matter. The right people love this approach. Don't merely be a blowhard with a megaphone.
Other tips for review popularity: spend less time on fondling the lens and saying how good it looks, talk more about how well its ergo works, cut out extraneous chat, provide links to any resources the maker provides. Don't nitpick, be thoughtful, spend less time in front of the camera. No dollar bills as judgments of overall sharpness.
One more thing to give Fred kudos for: he provides links to member's image sets on the front page of his reviews. No one can cover all bases, and more is most definitely better. No one wants to spend a grand on a lens only to find out it won't work for their needs. Help them out. Be helpful.
Nov 06, 2023 at 08:52 PM
Previous versions of philip_pj's message #16385665 « Nikon Zf as a platform for adapted/native manual focus lenses »
