Thank you! I was not aware of the site. Also the flicker suggestion is very good! I will explore both of these.
I agree - it is not a clear cut but certainly it helps in decision making.
Determine what you want to photograph and look for lenses and camera that best suit it.
I agree. But I also think the opposite is true: the gear you have will influence what you do with it.
For example, I shoot with a FF DSLR and prime lenses. So going out with a camera is a deliberate choice, and I rarely carry a camera “by accident”. If I had a mobile phone, and I always had it with me, and it took good photos, I’m sure my portfolio would look very different.
1 Like
I think that still falls into the category of what you want to photograph, since a light, carry around camera will lend itself to specific sorts of photography(day to day, travel, street, etc). Most people do those kinds of photography because they bought the kind of gear that would allow them to do it, and not by occasion of already having said gear.
1 Like
I like practical comparisons between lenses I’m considering.
Such as Panasonic Leica 15mm f1.7 vs m.Zuiko 17mm f1.8:
1 Like
I agree that it makes sense to keep your actual use case firmly at the front of all considerations. If you don’t know your use case(s) buy the cheapest old gear you can get your hands on so that you can find out what you need.
I think it’s important to like using the gear so size, build, looks and handling are important to me.
I think I should underscore “firmly” 
Thank you!
I didn’t know about this site.
There’s several other comments here that are probably enough for you, with links to good reviews sites that I also didn’t know before.
Anyway I wanted to add something else, hopefully it’s not added noise and you may find it useful.
I have tested lots of system just because I’m a gearhead and like to play with tools. I started as a Nikon guy and surely I must have said something like “I’ll never buy Canon” over the years. And now guess what, I have a Nikon DSLR (D810) and a Canon mirrorless (EOS R).
I have also extensively used m43 and Fuji cameras; I’m not rich by any means, but I simply bought everything second hand, and I have never, ever bought the very expensive glass like the white Canon zooms or the f1.2 beasts etc.
Due to the kind of photo that I like to take, the 50mm has always been a constant on all these systems; it’s a generic, boring lens that does not impart anything special to the photos and I like that, it forces me to be a bit more creative. Additionally this is a cheap lens to make and there isn’t really much difference between a generic 50/1.8 and a 50/1.2; the better optical qualities are not worth in my view the extra cost, bulk and portability. Also, I keep reminding myself how Galen Rowell preferred consumer-grade equipment rather than pro lenses because of weight and size (and in fact one of the lenses that are very dear to me is the Nikon 70-150 f/3.5 E-lens that Rowell used so effectively in some of his most outstanding photographs).
Therefore my personal approach is to go for lenses first, then cameras. And since all the systems have more than one 50mm option, this is easy, I can choose between all kind of systems really. So that’s what I’ve done, hopping from Nikon (D)SLRs to m43 cameras to Fuji and Canons, always looking for the perfect combination of reliability, portability and effectiveness.
I’ve never been bothered by the qualities of the sensor underneath, as getting good light and making interesting composition are the most important factors for my photographs (not staged, not studio, natural light); so I have now photos that I’m very proud of that have been taken with a Fuji X-Pro1, Olympus EM1, Nikon D600, Canon RP etc, there is nothing that makes me say oh I wish I’d have had a Sony 7RRR with its 80Mp BSICMOS instead because I could have pulled an extra stop from the shadows… this is totally irrelevant for me.
One last thing, regarding the examples you showed us; keep in mind that I was blown away the first time I tried to take photos with artificial light (simple speedlight with very basic modifiers); the extra crispness and clarity of photos taken in controlled situation is simply incredible for those of us that are usually relying on natural light (I’m talking obviously about portraits). Perhaps that would explain why you were also impressed by photos taken with the same lens you have; anything, any lens would shine a much brighter light, so to speak, if using speedlights or strobes.
4 Likes
Thank you!
Yes - there are many good sites mentioned here. And I am visiting all of them. Certainly appreciate the input from all who replied.
The links didn’t quite work (I was hoping to include direct to pictures links). For some reason I am fascinated by the details. And I realize they most likely won’t be visible on print.
My best pictures are done with the 50mm and a few of them are wide open. There are times when the shadows did not work as I expected (or hoped) with the 18-135. In theory - some mistakes could have been corrected (if I was carrying a speedlight for example).
What you are pointing to - the speedlight / strobe effect - I was not aware of. What I mean - I did notice difference when there is sufficient light and especially with properly added speedlight for me. But I did not know about the dependency.
Never had good experience with used equipment (and I tried - not photographic one). To some extend I envy people who are able to utilize it. This is one of the reasons why end up using my equipment for a much longer time.
Once again - thank you for the input!
Super jealous of that. I was tossing around a similar idea here, but it didn’t go over that well with the fam.
I’m sure you will make it happen. My wife and I turn 60 this year so we wanted to celebrate. We had a cycling trip from Amsterdam to Brussels and Brugge cancelled by Covid last year and we really wanted to go back to Europe but the war has really impacted me. The thought of being on vacation while others have their entire lives ripped from them is at the moment too hard to comprehend.
So we decided just to stay in Canada. We have been out west and seen many parts of BC and Alberta so we thought we should go in the opposite direction this time 
I hear ya on the war.
For Canadians, Canada has the advantage of being accessible without flying, which is a gong show right now.
We are flying but not until the end of the summer and from our smaller regional airport which fingers crossed is in better shape than the major ones… I have no idea what is up but every business I know cannot get and or retain staff. The govt just announced that anyone 18 and with only highschool van apt for passport and immigration jobs that pay 70 to 90 k…when would that have ever been heard of?? Those jobs were like gold and impossible to get unless you had a connection…
I’ve heard that Porter out of Billy Bishop is not having the same level of problems.
I was going to say the same thing. I think the idea of getting a new, very modern body that can really pull up the shadows is fine, but an alternative (and a much less expensive alternative at that) would be to add more light to the scene so you have more data to work with. I too was floored with how much better the clarity and colors looked when I started using a speedlite instead of just natural light. Obviously you can’t just use a speedlite in all situations (e.g. wide landscapes), but you can add light in other ways too (e.g. use a tripod for a longer exposure). Obviously this isn’t an appropriate solution for all situations, but I think it’s something worth considering in addition to the more obvious choice of buying newer equipment.
2 Likes
Good to know…I live in Hamilton and Swoop flies right to deer Lake near Gros Morne so I can avoid Toronto all together… still crossing my fingers :). Thanks for the tip
Just as a side note: while opticallimits.com is very good in their analysis, their verdict is very much centered on optical perfection. This might be good for some people who really need this but for myself I found that on the long run other aspects are at least as important as sharpness, vignetting, distortion and those aspects. For example I love my Fuji 16-80 F4 lens for its compactness and general versatility. Opticallimits rated this lens optically basically as trash - while I find that these weaknesses can all be worked around without much hassle.
3 Likes
In the end, specially as a hobby, I think enjoying the gear and wanting to take pictures with it is much more important than the rest. Who’s gonna look at a picture 20 years down the line and think “Damn, I wish my picture was 20% sharper”.
Specially in modern times where most lenses have more than acceptable image quality. With all the AI assisted image enhancing algorithms, in a few years we’ll probably be able to make up for that without much effort at all (if we even want).
4 Likes
I don’t disagree! That’s why I mentioned haptics and tactile feel and preempted my statement with “these tests have their limit” and then I mentioned optical characteristics…I should have made more clear that “fun to shoot with” and “practicality” are also immensly important when judging camera systems and lenses.
2 Likes
I do think opticallimits is still worthwhile even for the 16-80 (which I like very much as well). It shows us which areas will need special attention. For example, it shows us that the 16-80 has somewhat weak corners at the wide end, which I deem perfectly acceptable in a travel lens; but it means I’ll try to zoom in somewhat for panos, for example, and stop down the long end where possible.
Just don’t take their verdict as a measure of holistic lens quality. I read them as an evaluation of a lens’ optical quality.
2 Likes