The Nikon Kerfluffle And Other Thoughts About Internet And YouTube Reviewers

Over the past few years, it has become evident to me that the nature and scope of Internet based camera and lens reviews, as well as associated commentary, has evolved significantly.  And...I don’t think this is a good thing.  

Back in the days when we only had photography magazines through which to get our information about new cameras and lenses, all the reviews were favorable.  All.  Every one.  One never saw a review that said a camera or lens was anything less than pretty darn good.  Hmmm!  Could that be because the camera manufacturers advertised heavily in the magazines?  I wondered.  Seriously, there was never a bad camera or less than "good" lens.  Some were better than others but they all performed well.  No serious criticism of any camera or lens.  My understanding was that if the magazines tested a piece of gear and if it didn't do well, they just didn't publish the review.  Didn't want to anger the advertisers, evidently!  At least, those are the conclusions I reached after subscribing to three or four of the top photo magazines for 25 years or more.  Thanks to electronic communication, things are much different now.  No magazines.  All Internet-based reviewers.  

It seems to me, almost universally, the reviewers of cameras and lenses, whether in written form on the Internet or in visual form on You Tube, act and talk as though everyone in their potential audience, everyone they are addressing with their reviews, opinions and comments, is a professional photographer or an advanced enthusiast.  Also, it seems they make the assumption that everyone in their potential audience has unlimited funds to purchase the latest, greatest and best gear.  Their reviews almost always reflect that only the fastest, most fully featured and professionally oriented cameras (which naturally are the most expensive) are worthy of praise and any lessor camera is to be scorned.  The continuing Internet frenzy over the introduction of the two Nikon mirrorless cameras reinforced this notion to me.

By doing so, these so-called mavens have pretty much eliminated a good portion of their audience as well as doing the craft a disservice.  I think many of these pontificators don’t necessarily have a lot of expertise and/or experience with a wide variety of gear over years and years, only an opinion based on limited or no experience with the gear they are reviewing.  But some do.  Unfortunately, people turn to these individuals for help and information as they present their opinion as fact in a very polished manner. 

Millions of people own and use cameras today.  I’m not talking about cameras as part of mobile phones, but actual cameras.  Many of those cameras are old film cameras.  Even more of those cameras are older digital cameras.  I would be willing to wager that an awful lot of those camera owners may be in the market for a newer, better digital camera now or in the near future.  But figuring out which to buy, without making a costly mistake, is a daunting challenge for the average person or budding photographer.

The natural place to start looking for information in order to make a good decision to buy a new camera is the Internet and/or You Tube.  But what will they most likely find? Reviewers who will tell them that, in reality, what may be a good, solid, decent digital camera is just no good because it doesn’t have two card slots or the buffer can’t record 75 14-bit RAW images before it slows or it doesn’t have focus that will track a cheetah in in a 60 mph dead run and rip off 15 frames per second while doing it.  They will hear that if the camera they are looking for doesn’t have 400+ focus points, it is rubbish.  They may hear that the battery will only allow them to make 350 images before recharging and that is intolerable.  They may say the camera is good but there aren’t 57 lenses available to support it.  You get my drift.  

These reviewers act as though their audience is only made up of professionals and those enthusiasts that are sports, wildlife, wedding or landscape photographers and anything less than a 40+ megapixel camera with 20 frames per second and instantaneous focus recording to two cards simultaneously is crap.  Have mercy.  Please!

Most people won't take 350 photos in a year.  Most will always have the camera set to single advance with one focus point.  Most will put it on Program and just point and press the button.  Most just want to take photos of their families, vacation, flowers, etc.  They will never need anything more than a basic, good, solid camera with a couple of zoom lenses.

My question is where does the average person go to get honest information to buy a decent solid camera?  Not the latest and greatest, but a decent, basic camera.  Where do people who just want to buy a good camera to learn, enjoy photography and/or make their art go to find information about a variety of cameras that will serve their basic needs?  Where do people go to find an honest opinion on how well a relatively simple camera, with easy to understand menus, that is relatively easy to use, feels good in their hands and has a decent number of well made lenses available so they can take travel photos, landscape photographs, portraits, record family events, make still lifes and macro photographs?

I don't think those sites exist. (The only one I can think of that comes close is Gordon Laing's Camera Labs) Yes, sites that review high end cameras are most certainly needed, but where is the balance?  The vast majority of camera buyers don’t have two, three,  four or more thousands of dollars US to spend on gear, let alone $3300 US or more on a just a camera body with no lens, cards, flash, etc.  But from what I hear and see is that anything less that those high end cameras with all their whiz-bang technical capabilities and electronic features are not worthy.  Trash.  Junk.  The camera companies who make any camera targeted for the average person should fail and be punished for making cameras that don't live up to these reviewers' expectations.  Of course, I exaggerate to make my point....

Why aren’t the digital equivalents of the Pentax K1000, the Nikon FE or FM, the Canon AE-1, the Minolta SRT-101 or the Olympus OM-1 or OM-2 no longer a viable choice for the millions of people who just want to enjoy their photography?  Why do these reviews scoff at anything less than some artificial standard they set?  Why is a camera with only one memory card (which was the standard even for the top of the line cameras until just recently) an “epic fail,”  as was stated by one person recently.  What’s wrong with a basic camera and a kit lens if you want to make your own art and derive satisfaction from your hobby?  Evidently, from what I hear, everything.

In the case of the recent Nikon kerfluffle, the comments and condemnation has all gotten pretty ridiculous, in my opinion.  This has gotten all blown out of proportion and does a huge disservice to the vast majority of those who want to buy a good camera for their own pleasure.  From what I understand, no one has even had the opportunity to hold or use a camera that has the final version of firmware.  All of the cameras shown were pre-production models.  No one was allowed to actually make images to gauge image quality, which is why we buy a good camera.  Yet, they were condemned.  Those two new Nikon mirrorless cameras may not have everything all 700 Internet experts each think they should have, but I'm betting that the Z6 and Z7 are pretty solid cameras that will give their owners really good image quality.  And, isn't that what is fundamentally about?  Image quality? 

Thinking about it, I think it all comes down to money.  The more controversy and attention they can generate, the more viewers they will have which results in more "clicks" on the site and that adds up to more money!  I think a lot of it has become about self-aggrandizement, attention and money.  Balance, thoughtfulness and reasonable opinion based upon a wide ranging audience has taken a back seat.  Just my opinion, of course.

I think too much emphasis are put on pixels numbers, features and speed.  I can't think of a single digital camera made today that would not give its owner outstanding image quality in most circumstances.  It is only when one gets to the "edges" so to speak, where those high-end attributes start to make a difference.  Most people never approach those edges in their photography.  More emphasis should be made on how the camera "feels" when you pick it up.  Does it make you want to pick it up?  Does it fit in your hands?  Also, more emphasis should be given to how easy it is for anyone to use the camera.  Are the controls straightforward?  Are the menus easy to understand?  Can you find a setting easily if you need to change something that is not on a button or knob?  Are there several good lenses available to go with it?  Are their strobes available if wanted?  To me, those are the things that matter more than 20fps or ISO 204,800.  As I said, the sophistication of all digital cameras is such that they all give us good images under most circumstances.

Would it serve the craft and the average photographer better if at least some of these pundits would balance their reviews with common sense, thoughtfulness and reality so as to attract a wider audience rather than have those individuals go to some box store and ask a clerk, who really knows nothing about photography, what he or she recommends they buy?  What a nightmare!

I wish I had a larger audience for this blog as I have loved photography for almost 50 years now and wish I could help all those out there who are just looking for some honest information to assist in buying a moderately priced good basic camera that will give good results, is easy to use and has a decent number of lenses available to expand their skills as they grow as a photographer.  But, alas, I don’t have a popular internet site and am not a You Tuber and am not looking for clicks to get more views and cash in on viewers.  

Money and fame be damned!  In the end, it's about bringing more and new people into the craft to enjoy it so gear manufacturers don't go out of business,  When that happens everyone loses.  But if those people can't find the information they are looking for, well, they will just turn to their phone as a camera.  Oh!  Has that already happened?  Gee Whiz!

End of major rant!  Thank you for indulging my little peeves. 

Join me over at Instagram @dennisamook or my website, www.dennismook.com. 

Thanks for looking. Enjoy! 

Dennis A. Mook 

All content on this blog is © 2013-2018 Dennis A. Mook. All Rights Reserved. Feel free to point to this blog from your website with full attribution. Permission may be granted for commercial use. Please contact Mr. Mook to discuss permission to reproduce the blog posts and/or images.