Thread: Ming Thein's excellent photography blog

Originally Posted by flysurfer

I remember reading his XF1 review (because folks kept praising it) and finding several statements that illustrated that he hadn't really understood the EXR concept and how the camera actually works. For me, this should nor happen when you are actually reviewing gear...

I've seen him make errors like that as well. For me personally, his errors, his general arrogance (statements like "Please go by the commentary rather than the reduced crops; I am looking at uncompressed RAW files on a calibrated monitor, not a websize JPEG" (1) are ridiculous when one is presenting 100% crops for evaluation in a review), and his blanket stereotypes of bloggers and forum-goers (2) make for a distasteful combination. He's also a hypocrite - for all his comments about bloggers who have to use the latest affiliate gear and post affiliate links (2, 3), he is a blogger who uses the latest gear and posts affiliate links.

Here's what he wrote in October (2):

One final point: above all else, I value integrity and honesty... I think in over the last three months I’ve made a grand total of $400 or so from referral fees; nice pocket money, but not even close to being enough for a decent lens... This allows me to maintain a level of objectivity that is impossible for pretty much everybody else – and I intend to keep it this way. MT

Complete BS. If he intends to keep it that way, why does he now have affiliate links in every post when before he did not? If he wants to criticize others for their motivations and claim objectivity, then he needs to walk the straight and narrow path like Sean Reid (who, by the way, does not criticize others). Or be honest about your conflict of interest and stop casting stones. If you write gear reviews that end with an affiliate link, you have a conflict of interest. There's no getting around that, so if you're honest and value integrity, just be transparent about that conflict of interest instead of pretending you're exempt from it.

Originally Posted by Armanius

Whether he understands the EXR or not, his photos with the XF1 sure made/makes me want to go buy one!! For my wife that is. :)

He's a good photographer (and postprocessor), so he can make photos with any camera that would make people want to buy one.

When I first stumbled across his stuff I thought it might be useful. In digging a little deeper, I have found it to be a little shallow. The actual photography stuff seems OK, but not exceptional. Good if you need it.

I am not a fan of his gear reviews. I notice too many blanket statements. My suspicion is that he is all over the map in terms of what he reviews. A lot of cameras, of wildly varying type and capability, and shallow reviews.

He is opinionated, which I like; I'm just not sure his opinions are based on spending quality time with the cameras. I prefer opinions based on photographic experience, and designed to provide useful experience to a potential purchaser.

Oh, and I agree with Amin regarding the BS.

My preferred reviewer is Michael Reichmann. Opinionated, based on real experience, and truly useful.

So Amin would change the title of the thread to Ming Thein's excellent photography and disingenuous blog?

Actually, i find most review sites useful. After you've read a few pieces by the same author, it's not very hard to filter out the BS or personal bias.

I like opinionated as well, and I'm with Stephen in that I prefer Michael Reichmann's reviews to Ming Thein's.

Luke, I agree with you, and I don't steer clear of any of the review sites. But even without taking into account my personal issues with Ming Thein's hypocrisy, etc, my primary reason for spending little time on his site is what I said in this thread in the first place - whether he likes something has very little predictive value as to whether I'll like it, and I don't find his analysis helpful either.

It's quite hard to write a competent review of a new and complex camera. I took me 4 months of research and shooting experience in order to write my review about the X-Pro1, which in the end paid 130 bucks and involved 2 full days just to write it all up in Word. But at least I could be sure that I knew what I was writing about. I knew more about it than Fuji's own product managers. In the end, it comes down to why you are writing stuff: to make money (aka for your benefit) or for your readers (aka for the benefit of others). Sadly, quality doesn't really pay-off, at least not in the Internet. Scoops and "scandals" do, they bring in the clicks. Write up some wild accusations about "inflated ISO" in a review, and you will become an overnight net celebrity.

Originally Posted by flysurfer

It's quite hard to write a competent review of a new and complex camera. I took me 4 months of research and shooting experience in order to write my review about the X-Pro1, which in the end paid 130 bucks and involved 2 full days just to write it all up in Word. But at least I could be sure that I knew what I was writing about. I knew more about it than Fuji's own product managers. In the end, it comes down to why you are writing stuff: to make money (aka for your benefit) or for your readers (aka for the benefit of others). Sadly, quality doesn't really pay-off, at least not in the Internet. Scoops and "scandals" do, they bring in the clicks. Write up some wild accusations about "inflated ISO" in a review, and you will become an overnight net celebrity.

Unfortunately this is all too true.

Reichmann, for example, is a very highly paid photographer, and sells instructional videos. Therefore his income is not dependent upon the reviews. Most are not in this position.

Actually, i find most review sites useful. After you've read a few pieces by the same author, it's not very hard to filter out the BS or personal bias.

I suppose that's true. What concerns me more is that many of the reviewers are not particularly experienced photographers, and they don't spend much time with the cameras. So the BS and bias don't worry me. What does is a lack of emphasis on reviewing a camera as it might actually be used. Most reviews are simply expanded feature lists. My interest is in benefits, not features.

As Flysurfer points out, it's too often about driving traffic. Which is why we get the goofy headlines, such as "Is the new ABC camera the XYZ killer", or the really weak 'shoot outs', and 'camera vs camera' stuff. In my not even remotely humble opinion you have to search really hard to find merit in these things.

I find it so much more helpful to read or hear what a photographer thinks of a piece of gear, rather than a professional reviewer.

When they really make an effort and spend time with a camera, it makes a huge difference. Flysurfer's time investment was worth it for me: his book is actually useful.

Originally Posted by flysurfer

It's quite hard to write a competent review of a new and complex camera. I took me 4 months of research and shooting experience in order to write my review about the X-Pro1, which in the end paid 130 bucks and involved 2 full days just to write it all up in Word. But at least I could be sure that I knew what I was writing about. I knew more about it than Fuji's own product managers. In the end, it comes down to why you are writing stuff: to make money (aka for your benefit) or for your readers (aka for the benefit of others). Sadly, quality doesn't really pay-off, at least not in the Internet. Scoops and "scandals" do, they bring in the clicks. Write up some wild accusations about "inflated ISO" in a review, and you will become an overnight net celebrity.

I don't really agree with this either. It may be difficult and time consuming to write a comprehensive review of a camera, but a competent review doesn't have to be comprehensive, and it isn't that hard to understand technologies like EXR.

I guarantee you Michael Reichmann doesn't spend months of research and shooting to do a review. He typically has the camera for a short while, uses it to photograph on a trip, and publishes a "first impressions" type review. Since he is a talented photographer with good insight and familiarity with many cameras, his first impressions can be more helpful to read than some comprehensive reviews, at least to me.

Certainly there are some with less insight, less familiarity with cameras and technology, and less care who publish link bait - sometimes without having even touched the camera - but that doesn't mean that it has to take months of hard work to do a review that people will find worthwhile.

Originally Posted by Amin Sabet

I don't really agree with this either. It may be difficult and time consuming to write a comprehensive review of a camera, but a competent review doesn't have to be comprehensive, and it isn't that hard to understand technologies like EXR.

I guarantee you Michael Reichmann doesn't spend months of research and shooting to do a review. He typically has the camera for a short while, uses it to photograph on a trip, and publishes a "first impressions" type review. Since he is a talented photographer with good insight and familiarity with many cameras, his first impressions can be more helpful to read than some comprehensive reviews, at least to me.

Certainly there are some with less insight, less familiarity with cameras and technology, and less care who publish link bait - sometimes without having even touched the camera - but that doesn't mean that it has to take months of hard work to do a review that people will find worthwhile.

Fair point. At least in part it connects to my preference for reviews to be done by photographers who really use the camera. I suspect (but don't know for sure) that Flysurfer's time was different because it resulted I. A comprehensive book. Anyway, yes it really shows when a review is completed based on their use, and familiarity with other cameras in real use.

Originally Posted by Amin Sabet

I don't really agree with this either. It may be difficult and time consuming to write a comprehensive review of a camera, but a competent review doesn't have to be comprehensive, and it isn't that hard to understand technologies like EXR.

Honestly, I have yet to find a single review that fully understood it. Maybe dpreview got it right, I'd have to check that.