
Search and Shop at the B&H Store
Articles and Reviews
Photography
Edwin's World
Readers' Gallery
Site Map
NikonLinks
Wedding Photography
|
Home >> Edwin's World
About Me
and CameraHobby
August 13, 2004
For
some reason, people seem interested in who I am and why I do what I
do, so here you are:
My
name is
Edwin Leong and I am an amateur photographer
working and residing in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. I moved
to Vancouver after graduating from the University of Victoria, and am
originally from a little town called Kamloops. I’m married with three
kids and I work as a desk jockey for a government agency, or in other
words, as a low level bureaucrat applying my red tape wherever and whenever
I can. If you want to know how old I am, well, I was a teenager during
most of the Reagan/Bush Sr. presidencies and went through my twenty-something
existentialist angst during the Clinton presidency. With Bush Jr's presidency,
I am now firmly ensconced in thirty-something, middle class material
possession accumulation.
I occasionally
do some commercial and event/wedding photography, but do not be fooled
by this blatant grasp for credibility, as the money I make doing photography
amounts to a spit in the ocean compared to how much I’ve spent pursuing
this maddening hobby. Truth is, I earn more money writing about photography
for this web site than I do actually doing photography, but that’s fine
because I pursue photography for myself.
In seeking
the experience and knowledge that one desires when pursuing a vocation
close to one’s heart, I have perused through many of the best and largest
Internet resources available to me when I started back in 1997. I also
bought many books and subscribed to many magazines in pursuit of photographic
knowledge, with nary a formal course or class work, although I did do
some photography and darkroom work as a senior back in high school and
had photos printed in the school paper and yearbook. Other than that,
the closest I’ve been to a photography class was the two-day Nikon School
put on by Larry Frank when he still worked for Nikon Canada.
By
1999, I thought I could add to the body of knowledge by self-publishing
on the Internet. Delusions of self-grandeur are attributed to the influences
of Philip Greenspun of Photo.net fame, who, in a very direct fashion,
stated that if you want to express yourself to the greatest number of
people in the most cost effective manner, you have to publish via the
Internet, because the old school, dead-trees publishers aren’t going
to take notice of you.
I took
his advice to heart and although I had little to really give in the
beginning, I published what I had and could back in June 1999. It started
oh so humbly with a small but usable 11 MB of server space via Netscape,
followed by a sizeable 50 MB at 50megs.com. However, within a year I
grew weary of banner ads and the limitations of free HTML editors. It
was time to get serious in self-publishing.
In 2000
CameraHobby.com was born and through various incarnations and designs,
has grown to be what it is now. As I learned more about how to edit
a web site, I applied it to CameraHobby, but it still reflects some
personal objectives and biases I have.
- CameraHobby
is not eye catching or flashy with edge of the art HTML editing. This
reflects my limited knowledge of HTML, but also of my desire to emphasize
content and not style. If you judge me, judge me for what I have to
say, not how I present it, because I’ll give it you in the most direct
fashion I know.
- CameraHobby
reviews and articles are mostly single web pages and that can result
in very long pages that require a lot of scrolling down. Perhaps some
reviews and articles could benefit from a bit of judicious pruning
into multiple pages, but this design parameter is a direct result
of my distaste for web sites that have but a screen’s worth of information
before I have to move onto another page to continue the review or
article. I don’t like having to hit through a dozen or more short
web pages; I like to see everything in one go. While high-speed Internet
users will not be affected much by this, dial-up readers could experience
some frustration.
- Part
of that frustration can also arise from my use of very high quality
JPEG files in a number of the reviews and articles. This is a catch-22
proposition for any Internet based writer and publisher. To avoid
criticism that low-resolution JPEGs offer little in the way of qualitative
comparisons, one must post high quality images, but to do means bandwidth
choking speeds for the dial-up users. It also takes its toll on the
publisher because the more bandwidth pumped out by the web site, the
higher the cost to support and host the web site.
- CameraHobby
material is based on my limited experience and knowledge and thus
is primarily meant for photographers who are also at or near my own
level as a photographer, which is to say, not that high. When I have
the time to read through some discussion groups or forums, I’m often
blown away by the number of people that have a high level of specialized
knowledge for a given topic.
About
Reviewing and Writing
- As
a result of my limited knowledge, my reviews are fairly simple and
non-technical. While I do try my best and post meaningful sample images
when I write comparison reviews, it is still at a real world level
for all to see what I see and write about. My lens reviews are probably
the weakest at CameraHobby because my personal use of the lenses places
less emphasis on distortion and artifacts as I do for sharpness and
resolution of detail. Unless it’s blatantly obvious, I don’t comment
much about vignetting, chromatic aberrations, coma, and other things
that consume some reviewers. The final criterion is does the lens
provide the results I desire?
- The
manner in which I write compared to other reviewers has been described
as “lightweight” by one wag, but so be it if I don’t have decades
of experience being a photographer, or decades being a computer geek
and engineer, or this or that, because I am after all an amateur photographer
with no technical background. I don’t have my prints on public display,
or in private collections and I claim no artistic merit in what I
photograph. Again, I do this primarily for my own benefit of seeking
knowledge and experience and CameraHobby is the medium for which I
distribute my findings.
- I try
not to comment specifically on something I don’t have experience with.
Walking into a store and handling a camera for 15 minutes does not
qualify anyone to write more than some cursory and introductory comments.
The one time that I did so, on a forum no less, I ended being the
subject of a humorous piece that I enjoyed enough to post
here.
- My personal
style of informal, conversational writing seems to have hit a chord
with many readers, who have sent me nice messages of thanks and support,
but as a public writer, I’m going to eventually write something that
will hit a chord in the wrong way. It’s happened a few times already,
but one has to take the good with the bad, because one is not infallible
and all knowing. If people believe I made a mistake or incorrect assessment,
I’d like to know and I don’t mind receiving politely worded correspondence
telling me where I may have erred. I may not agree (as I have opined
in the past), but communication is for the most part, a good thing.
- If I
talk about a “reference” product, I do not mean reference in terms
of being the absolute best available, but merely as a point of reference
that I know of comfortably to compare other products to.
While I
enjoy seeing my web site become successful and like to brag about stats
as much as the next person, after a certain point it doesn’t mean much
since I don’t have any specific sponsors or advertisers worried about
how many visitors, hits, or page views the site receives. CameraHobby
has already been a victim of its own success due to the amount of bandwidth
it goes through, and while some generous people have offered to make
donations, personal pride have seen me decline such offers. I’d rather
see my articles and reviews spread out and posted elsewhere than to
have to put a button on my site saying “Donate to the CameraHobby charity.”
I’ve had
people suggest that I would make a good professional reviewer, but I
don’t think so because I think whatever copy I send in would be sliced
and diced to meet the limited space of a magazine. A web site allows
one to write as much as needed to satisfy one’s personal requirements
for reviewing. Unfortunately, you will have to put up with my design
parameters for those reviews and articles J
Occasionally,
somebody will offer me a review sample of equipment or software to try
out in the hopes of a favorable review to be posted and causing a surge
in hits to the person’s or company’s web site. When I was just a reader
of reviews I wondered why there weren’t more negative reviews published,
but then you learn that magazines and many sponsored web sites are beholden
to advertising revenue from the same companies that provide review samples.
Publish
an honest review of a piece of stinko and stinko company pulls their
advertising resulting in a loss of revenue. Publishing is a business
and you don’t stay in business without advertising revenue. For a small
guy like me, I have more flexibility, as there are no specific sponsors
or advertisers beyond the Google ads running down the right side of
the pages. There is no one to offend per se, but of course that won’t
stop stinko company from taking exception to your tepid opinion of their
product.
And of
course, if you write brutally honest reviews, well you’re not likely
to be receiving any more review samples or requests. For me, I don’t
receive so many offers that I’ll have to worry about doing a John Kerry
“nuancing” my reviews or articles. While one cannot avoid receiving
“free” evaluation software in order to write such reviews, hardware
is a different matter and I don’t receive free samples of such and decline
when offered, as has already happened. I either purchase it if I can
afford it, or return it to the vendor, thus I am quite comfortable in
stating that I have never received material consideration for the reviews
I write. The vast majority of the reviews and articles are about items
that I own, or that have been loaned to me by friends willing to put
up with my begging.
My approach
to reviewing is to explain why it is that I chose the product (or would
or would not choose). This often results in background information first
about the product and what led me to it followed by my decision making
process to compare it to other similar products and what ultimately
led to decide on the specific product at hand. Afterwards I run through
some basic tests to see if it met my expectations and what I like or
do not like about it. Then a wrap-up and conclusion follows.
Sometimes
I make recommendations and sometimes those recommendations are qualified
as "highly," or just "recommended." Here's a very
general guide to my subjective recommendations:
Ultimate
Recommendation – product under review does not get any better
than this. I doubt that this level of recommendation will ever be
given, because it implies a near perfect product that overachieves
compared to its competition. Given my lack of experience with so many
tools, it would be presumptuous of me (and folly) to suggest that
I can offer such worldly experience.
Highly
Recommended – product under review is as good as I’ve used and
come across with perhaps only a few minor nitpicks about it. On a
real world level, this recommendation is as high as I’ll probably
give. May also represent an incredible value for the money, depending
on the product and comparison to other units.
Recommended – product under review is good, does the job, but may have one or
two things about it that could be improved.
Not
Recommended – too many issues for product to overcome at this
time, or new products have surpassed the performance or features offered
to preclude, or remove recommendation.
No Recommendation (or no comment) – neutral opinion of product. Review consists of description
and how it worked.
That’s
basically it. Depending on whether my review is one of the first ones
to be posted (usually not) or if it lags behind other reviews already
posted, will determine the level of detail I provide. While it’s nice
to be among the first reviews posted, being a late reviewer can offer
some benefits too, as one has the research already undertaken by the
first reviewers and one can do a summary of all the key points. The
downside is that by the time you post a late review, much of it is already
conventional wisdom.
That in
essence is my mission statement, if you can call it that. I do not claim
perfection, but I will write an honest, real world review based upon
the knowledge and experience I have accumulated to date.

|
|