First of all, thank you for visiting my new site. As noted above, it is still under construction but should be fully functional shortly.
This is site is centered around photography (and some videography/cinematography). The main types of content you will find here are:
1) Gear reviews (e.g. lenses, cameras, tripods, etc.)
2) Informational articles about photography (e.g. shooting technique or post-processing in ACR & Photoshop)
3) "Musings" or general thoughts about photography and the camera industry.
4) Articles that are more nebulous in nature (for example, I'm working on one about Cinema vs. Stills Photography) - I guess these could be called "philosophical" articles.
Graflex Crown Graphic
Olympus OM-D E-M5 w/ an Olympus 30/3.5 Macro
Given the volatility often seen in the comments and forums of gear related sites, I figured I’d get a few things out of the way up front about how I approach my reviews and why I do or do not include certain things a person may be accustomed to if they read other sites. For example, I don’t shoot test charts or brick walls*. If I did, I certainly wouldn’t post the pictures.
*Ok, sometimes I shoot brick walls as they are an easy and quick way to gauge certain optical flaws with lenses and rule out (or confirm) sample variation for my own testing purposes. The fact that I have to walk ten feet to get to a brick wall is helpful too.
I’ve used, by every reasonable definition, a hell of a lot of cameras (translation: at least one camera, usually far more, from every modern manufacturer with the exception of Phase One). I am loyal to no brand beyond the investment I have in my own equipment; it is of course costly to switch an entire system. And rather pointless, given that every system has both strong assets and varying deficiencies. You either work around the deficiencies, find an alternative, or invest in multiple systems.
Such shortcomings can range from lack of necessary lenses (macros, tilt shifts), to size/weight, to basic feature sets; a Fujifilm X100F probably wouldn’t be a sports photographer’s most wise choice of gear, while a Nikon D5 likely wouldn’t be the greatest pick for backpacking the Appalachian Trail.
None of this is to say I don't have my preferences in terms of UI or haptics - which generally tend to be (relatively) similar among models from the same manufacturer - but again, this has nothing to do with the name on the front. Besides, show me one person who doesn't have such preferences one way or another.
The point is: I use the gear that works for me. What works for me is not what works for everyone. I won’t tell you how well X camera does at tracking a football player because I don’t shoot sports. I don’t care what the name is on the camera; it either works for me or it doesn’t. Nothing is ever perfect, nor is anything ever absolutely worthless. I have to decide where it lands in that gray area for me; though I may certainly recommend something that doesn’t particularly work for me, but is obviously valuable for others.
I run systems across three different sensor sizes (four, if you count the iPhone). At any given time, I have lenses from at least seven or eight different manufacturers. That’s just counting non-vintage lenses (and I don't care to spend half a day counting the number of those in my arsenal). Everything is ultimately a compromise between utility, need, quality, price, and ROI (and, I admit, there is often a “want” factor that wiggles its way in there too). A lens like the Panasonic 12-32/3.5-5.6 is not a perfect – or even great – lens (it is very good, though) but it does check a lot of those boxes and ultimately adds up to a rather great investment, particularly if purchased as a loss leader within a kit.
I am both a photographer and videographer. That does not, however, mean that I will test the video capabilities of every camera. In fact, I won't test the video capabilities of most stills cameras. I have no interest in using a Nikon D850 for its video in the same way I have no interest in using a Blackmagic Pocket 6K for stills photography. If I’m going to shoot a casual video for whatever reason, I’ll just use my iPhone. A camera has to have significant enough advantages for me to consider it as a useful videography tool and therefore for me to subsequently spend time evaluating it for such use. Not to mention, my threshold for video quality is quite high and there are few stills/hybrid cameras on the market that meet those demands (though the list is ever-growing). Video remains in a very binary realm for me - either impromptu and casual (deploy the iPhone) or extremely planned and meticulous (deploy a cinema camera). Exceptions, of course, exist.
Lastly: I do not post full-resolution photos because I've had far too many instances of image theft, even just via personal social media. Exceptions may be made in A-to-B comparison (i.e. X lens vs. Y lens) reviews.