Is there any place i can find any truthful camera/lens reviews

File: IMG_20170530_131018-01.jpg (2MB, 3200x2400px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3200x2400px

Buy sony

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	ZTE B2017G
Camera Software	Snapseed 2.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	4 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:30 13:12:06
Exposure Time	1/24 sec
F-Number	f/1.9
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	447
Lens Aperture	f/1.9
Brightness	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	3.70 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3200
Image Height	2400
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

Dxomark. Read measurements. Dont bother much with the total aggregate score.

>>3086310

Eric Rossi

>>3086310

Kai Wong

>>3086310
Is Ken normcore?

>>3086310
>Is there any place i can find any truthful camera/lens reviews or opinions that don't shill brands with every second word they speak/write?

No. At any given price point the only really meaningful differences are in the handling and the available lenses/accessories. If you are looking at dropping 2.5-3 grand or more on a camera it shouldn't be too much to go to a proper shop to try the fucking things out.

And yes, I know shops might also try to steer you towards the one with the highest profit margin but at least you are in a better position to make an informed decision of your own.

>>3086323
Dxo is worse than Ken and Jason Lanier combined though.

ken is based god, angry photographer if you shoot nikon or fuji

>>3086310
>Ken Rockwell
Just for straight up specification information. It's easy to read and to the point. I disregard all opinion he applies though.

>Kai Wong
Good for humorous light testing in the streets.

>DXO Mark
I only go here when friends are too busy fighting about hairline differences just to help move the stupid conversation along.

>FroKnowsPhoto
Also for scenario based usability understanding. Not so much results he generates. Hype either.

>/p/
Just to see how memebois and sonyshills react to canon/nikon. Also angry canon/nikon people reacting to sonyshills and to toss throwaway shots into the crowd of assholes to see the evolution of /p/ over time.

>>3086600
>fro
>even considering the king of egoshill

>>3086310
lenstip dot com
lensrentals is also quite a levelheaded not shill and interesting in general
dxomark is poopoo because they don't publish their measurement data

>>3086617

Fro is a twat. I'm sure that the 2 guys who work with him hate him.

He's also pretty shit at taking photos.

>>3086310
http://www.steves-digicams.com/

>>3087213
>http://www.steves-digicams.com/

Thanks Steve.

>>3086513
They are doing reasonable objective measurements on a lot of cameras.

Ken and Jason do mostly subjective viewer bait. Absolutely pointless.

If you want to see an individual doing low tech reviews of lenses all right for the most part, watch Christopher Frost or some other person who at least tries a bit to fairly systematically work with their low tech method of reviewing lenses.

>>3086636
> dxomark is poopoo because they don't publish their measurement data
Publishing measurement data is almost all that they do.

There is no problem with DxO. It's just a problem with people that don't like the results.

https://www.dpreview.com/

>>3087373
>There is no problem with DxO. It's just a problem with people that don't like the results.
Spoken like a true fan

>>3087213
hey stevo, sup! mind if i ask you a question?

>>3087373
>Publishing measurement data is almost all that they do.

They publish results, i.e. their interpretation of the data, not the data itself. There's a difference. I'd rather base my evaluation on actual photographs than on a bunch of numbers that some french twat farted out.

Anywhoo, lensrentals is much more reliable source, since they test several copies and sometimes actually show what is inside the gear, thus exposing the level of quality and engineering.

https://www.youtube.com/user/christopherfrost

>>3086310
photozone.de is fairly short and to the point with their reviews, they also tend to be harsh on their criteria and won't hesitate to mark a lens down a star if doesn't perform as well as they think it should.

>Bothering with anything other than technical information

>Not taking the time to go to a store where you can try out each camera you're interested in to see how they handle.

Why do people even bother reading actual reviews?

>>3086310

To anybody other than a beginner he's a certified idiot who doesn't really know what he's doing. Look how he dresses. That is not how somebody on the ball would cloth themselves.

>>3088149
>lensrental

sure, but they have like 10 lenses reviewed. Hardly useful.

For me, it's Thom Hogan, the best camera reviewer.

Of course, he's biased to Nikon, but not blindly so. He has a clear preference for professional tools, and his reviews will savage any camera that doesn't satisfy his needs (features, slots, controls, ergonomics, lenses, performance).

>>3086372
lololol

his fashion sense is almost as ironically bad as his pictures are.

you should only be trusting people that have engineering backgrounds. they'll tell you for the most part that your system is almost irrelevant, and that some lenses are clearly better than others. i still like kai for entertainment value though

so with all that being said, angry photographer and rockwell are the only people worth paying attention to when it comes to lens reviews. maybe ask /p/ if you want the opinion of the peasant horde

>>3086310
Once you figure out how to fucking shoot, you won't really need reviews. You'll just know what you need and how to get it. Protip: There's not a lick of fucking difference between the flagship Canon and Nikon gear. And if you're not buying flagship stuff, then it doesn't fucking matter. All digital cameras nowadays are competent and far exceed 99% of people's abilities.

>>3091117
^^^^^^^^^ T H I S