Nice discussion so far.

@ SkintBrit: Glad you brought that up. I actually do subscribe to "hard print" publication; moreover, I also subscribe to some (not all photography related) that are digital (I use Zino Reader to view them). I'm also looking forward to see what Apples new "News Stand" will have to offer on their iTunes Site.

@ TaoTeJared Wells said. I tend to put more value and trust on those individuals (as I get to know them more) on what they have say on Photography in general: be it equipment acquisition/usage and proper photography techniques etc.

But I'm also a realist; in that I recognize that Photography is a business...much like any other industry. I have no problem in those reviewers, be it pro or not, to earn a living by marketing the good they review and as result earn some money...more power to them. As a consumer, we all have to do our own "due diligence" in gather information, on any subject matter and them move forward. As the saying goes: Caveat emptor.

Hey guys, what about the "hands on trials for gear" part of bjrichus's question? I frequently buy gear based on review (and your) recommendation without ever seeing it in the flesh before it arrives through the door! Anyone else?

Interesting responses... Kai is obviously an entertainment 'persona' or he is one messed up dude (all in the nicest possible way), what with the pink painting and destruction testing he does ;-)

I think there is a place for his videos and if nothing else, it is entertaining. I agree with the comment about seeing him actually using an item and commenting on that real experience has a place alongside the more 'measurement' kind of testing.

What I am learning from reading these comments is that it really is important to get a wide variety of inputs both hands on and measurement and then actually get hands on with the device, then review the results.

TaoTeJared said:There is something about "Pro" reviewer that I don't always put in the same light as someone who just enjoys photography. I'm willing to bet CaryTheLabelGuy may chime in here to say he does it because he enjoys it and doesn't get paid to do it.

Exactly. I do them because of my passion for photography and the joy I get from working with the gear as well as testing the gear. I'm a total gear-head, so it's right up my "alley". I also love helping my fellow photogs (professional, enthusiast or amateur) make good and educated decisions on gear purchases. I have zero bias (until i've processed my findings) and have been surprised by my findings before. For instance, the 50mm prime comparo. I wasn't expecting the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 to test that well - but it did and was actually my fave f/1.4 lens.

Fun fact: I've also developed a love for writing even though it doesn't come easy for me.

elvishefer said:
I like watching Dom Bower's stuff on YouTube, but not for new gear reviews so much as for 'Doing interesting things with what's available'. He's Scottish, occasionally does videos drunk, is entertaining and interacts with his community.

I also watch Digital Rev because the team occasionally comes up with an entertaining script, while at the same time showing off everyday Hong Kong.

As for hard-core comparisons, I sometimes turn to dxo.

That's the reason I watch Digital Rev. I have family in HK and I've wanted to visit so badly, but I have no time. So I end up watching Digital Rev.

I like watching Dom Bower's stuff on YouTube, but not for new gear reviews so much as for 'Doing interesting things with what's available'. He's Scottish, occasionally does videos drunk, is entertaining and interacts with his community.

I also watch Digital Rev because the team occasionally comes up with an entertaining script, while at the same time showing off everyday Hong Kong.

As for hard-core comparisons, I sometimes turn to dxo.

jonnyapple said:
Well, he did one for the 24-120 f/4, I think. When was that released?

I think he expressed his impressions, but I don't think he ever did a formal review. I was looking forward to a D7000 review from him, but he hasn't done that yet.

SkintBrit said:
Am I the only one here who subscribes to real life hold em in your hand, read while you're in the bath, chop down the rain forest MAGAZINES!? Yes I know bjrichus was particularly interested in online sources of information, but I'm surprised none of you mention magazines in your replies?
Like most of you, firstly I do read reviews before buying equipment, (not everyone does), and like you I look to many and various places for it. As Cary said, I often find the the same item can be reviewed by several different people, and there conclusions are not the same. For that reason I like to see/read various reviews to get the consensus of opinion before committing my hard earned cash.

With regards to DigitalRevTv, I'm pretty sure they've been watching Top Gear in the UK, (and now I see in the US!) as their style of testing and reviewing has too many similarities to be coincidental. It's meant to be 'tongue in cheek' reporting and far more entertainment than serious journalism. I personally enjoy it, but would never rely solely on Kai's recommendation, just as I would never buy a car based on Clarkson's.

Another aspect that hasn't been discussed here is impartiality. What motivation do people/companies have for writing the reviews they do. Kai obviously gets paid by DRTV, who sell the items he tests, but what about Moose KR and others? I think some of them post links on their sites to online retailers that pay them a commission if they make a sale, but some don't, why do these people review things?

I would subscribe to magazines, but it's an issue of me changing my address every 9 months or so. I'm at university for 9 months, home for about 3-ish. Changing addresses officially at the university is cheap, but it's paperwork I don't want to do. Also, checking your mail is annoying. So I don't subscribe. Even if I were home, I wouldn't subscribe, why would I? I don't need gear, I just read reviews if I'm curious about the product.

Cary- I wish I had the money to buy gear just to review.

I read a ton of magazines. UK has many better one's then the USA IMO and those are usually 40 days outdated by the time they get here. The only issue I have with some Mags is that the same 1 or two people write them all the time, and they Love their Cannon's. Everything else they write you can tell editors have taken a bleach pen and have forced them to say nice things about other brands. I think it is just amusing when writers are forced to be impartial.

Motivation is a good question SkintBrit! Supposedly most reviewers don't get paid by the companies and I do believe them. Not everything is a conspiracy theory. Their advertisements are created by Google ad-sense and have little control of them. I do believe manginess and others do get free equipment they test and then have to send back. This is not a given and if they review it badly, bye bye free stuff.

There is something about "Pro" reviewer that I don't always put in the same light as someone who just enjoys photography. I'm willing to bet CaryTheLabelGuy may chime in here to say he does it because he enjoys it and doesn't get paid to do it.

The only stuff I have seen Moose, McNally, Kelby, and many others review are because people have written in and are asking questions what they use. Weather paid or not, it is good to see another view to take into account.

I love watching Kai - take him for what he is, not what you want him to be.

Am I the only one here who subscribes to real life hold em in your hand, read while you're in the bath, chop down the rain forest MAGAZINES!? Yes I know bjrichus was particularly interested in online sources of information, but I'm surprised none of you mention magazines in your replies?
Like most of you, firstly I do read reviews before buying equipment, (not everyone does), and like you I look to many and various places for it. As Cary said, I often find the the same item can be reviewed by several different people, and there conclusions are not the same. For that reason I like to see/read various reviews to get the consensus of opinion before committing my hard earned cash.

With regards to DigitalRevTv, I'm pretty sure they've been watching Top Gear in the UK, (and now I see in the US!) as their style of testing and reviewing has too many similarities to be coincidental. It's meant to be 'tongue in cheek' reporting and far more entertainment than serious journalism. I personally enjoy it, but would never rely solely on Kai's recommendation, just as I would never buy a car based on Clarkson's.

Another aspect that hasn't been discussed here is impartiality. What motivation do people/companies have for writing the reviews they do. Kai obviously gets paid by DRTV, who sell the items he tests, but what about Moose KR and others? I think some of them post links on their sites to online retailers that pay them a commission if they make a sale, but some don't, why do these people review things?

Lately, I've been fortunate enough to be able to do my own testing and gear reviews for publication. I trust my own findings - plus I really enjoy doing them. I don't read online reviews, honestly. I don't like tainting my testing/reviews with other's opinions, which is why I really try and stay away from reading them. Obviously, not everybody can operate like this, so take my input on this subject with a grain of salt. :)

NSXType-R said:
Moose hasn't done a review in who knows how long.

Well, he did one for the 24-120 f/4, I think. When was that released?

I look at everything, but mostly land into the Qualitative reviews. Most good ones, are done by actual photographers. 90% of quantitative reviews are a joke in my book and there is only about 10% that ever interests me.

Maybe it is because I have read and understand the limitations of the "big" Quantitative review sites to know that most all of them are caught in the trap of picking and choosing which couple of variables to test and ignoring the vast amount of predicaments that arise when comparing two companies items that do not "neatly" add up.

Reviews of Pentax camera's always show this. Pentax on it DSLRs have Noise reduction set to zero as default. Most "quantitative" sites report them at terribly noisy. In reality, owners bump the NR up a couple of notches and the noise is better handled and retains sharpness than many in the same class. The testers have put themselves in a box of only "Defaults" and have tested the camera in unrealistic terms.

Quantitative is good for: Distortion, Falloff, CAs, showing the difference of the ISO noise sometimes to other cameras and not much else.

The good way to find if a review site is full of BS is to see if they create a "Score" to say how good or bad something is. Then notice if all the scores are bunched together. If they are, they are a joke and just want to make people "happy" with their purchase.

TaoTeJared said:
I think you need to separate this into two categories for to make it civil an appropriate.

I think the real question is: Do you prefer a Quantitative or Qualitative review?

1st Category: Those who primarily try to make a quantitative review.
----i.e. PopPhoto, DPReview, DxOMark, KR (although 50% qualitative.)

2nd Category: Those who make qualitative reviews.
----i.e. Digitalrev TV (Kai), Thom Hogan, Steve Huff Photo, Steve's Digicams, Luminous-Landscape, CNet, Moose Peterson, Tons of blogs.

Moose hasn't done a review in who knows how long.

CNet isn't something I really go to.

I think you need to separate this into two categories for to make it civil an appropriate.

I think the real question is: Do you prefer a Quantitative or Qualitative review?

1st Category: Those who primarily try to make a quantitative review.
----i.e. PopPhoto, DPReview, DxOMark, KR (although 50% qualitative.)

2nd Category: Those who make qualitative reviews.
----i.e. Digitalrev TV (Kai), Thom Hogan, Steve Huff Photo, Steve's Digicams, Luminous-Landscape, CNet, Moose Peterson, Tons of blogs.

There a number of YouTube posts that I follow: here are some for you to consider: Adorama TV, JaredPolin (aka FroKnowsPhoto), gregorycazillo, ppsop2009 (Bryan Peterson) and lastly but not least DigitalRev. For the websites, Ken Roockwell, Thom Hogan, Marc Silber Show, Joe McNally, and Chase Jarvis.

As Kai would say: "Booookeh laacheeessss." :P

what new gear?
I can't afford new gear, wait until the guys at Nikon Forum has thashed and discussed everything about it and then look for some used ones.

Okay okay, for reviews, Niko thinks that KenR is the greatest thing sinces Mercedes Benz cameras, actually I think KR is Niko, however KR is more scientific than Kai.
remember we are discussing photographic equipment not sliced bread.

about Kai, he is entertainment for people who do photography, like:
painting a camera pink
pouring coffee on a camera to see how it survies
using a Nikon and Canon to pound nails in a toughness test
the guy cannot be taken seriously, but is entertaining

main blog?
there is a main blog?
where can it be found?

now to get serious,

er, what was the question again?

Broxibear and I are having a discussion on the main blog page about something else entirely, and I know that many here in the forum don't read it - shame on you ;-) and my last post made me think hard about this little diversion.

I'd like to know the view of others here about where they go online to read reviews and get info about new photo products. Especially video reviews like those that Kai does on Digitalrev TV.

This is my post to Broxibear and it is mostly my personal view of Kai (I'm not being negative about him, as if this is a deliberate persona, it is actually working well for me) but how do YOU feel about this:

"You mentioning Kai makes me wonder what makes him so compelling a view?

I *HATE* him, he acts like such a … I don’t know, a mix of idiot, geek, and noob all rolled into one, but it is just like that classic train wreck thing, I can’t stop watching!"