Mike , you are the camera producers nightmare! You have the knowledge and understanding that ridicules the entire regime of " you need to buy this , upgrade now!!!! Or your photos will be shit ! " great , i applaud you .
Mike, since you have paid for it anyway, it might be wiser to just keep the more expensive lens as a backup lens for your out of town workshops, just in case something happens to your cheaper lens again some day? Then you will never be without a lens again in case of another mishap.
So much money and time spent on equipment and lenses that offer tiny improvements. We should all be more focused on using our own abilities to improve our photography, not let technology do it for us!
The 18-55 “kit” lens has been lauded by many as a superior lens. Fuji X-mount shooters are really lucky to have this option for great photo quality. I bought an X-T2 and later traded it for an X-T3. I bought the body only and purchased the 16-55. I have some other lenses but fell so much in love with the 16-55 that I rarely take it off. “Too sharp” has never crossed my mind. Having a fixed aperture with actual markings on the lens is a wonderful thing. I recently bought an X-E3 as a “walking around” camera. I bought it with the 18-55 lens. That combination is fantastic for going out and about and not carrying a lot of weight. It’s really good for “street photography” (or any photography where you don’t want to look like a professional photographer and everyone hides from you). I’ve done the side-by-side comparisons and it is amazing how close in quality the two lenses are for the “average” shot at f5.6. Your photos showed this well. But I submit this for your consideration: There is an old saying that you shouldn’t take a picture, you should make a picture. I think the 16-55 lens has a lot more options for the person who wants to “make” a picture. I’m lucky to be able to afford both. For someone on a budget, they can’t go wrong with the 18-55. For someone who shoots “auto” or close to it, the 18-55 will work very well. For the person who wants more options for creativity and does like the extra sharpness afforded by the 16-55, it is a better lens.
You are so right in what you say Mike, I shoot events for a local newspaper and at all of the events I photograph I am along side newspaper photographers with Nikon D5 cameras with very expensive lenses. I however use a Nikon D300 and a D300s usually with an 18-200mm lens. When the photographs are published in our respective publications you would be hard pressed to differentiate between the cameras that took the image.
Well, Bob, I think sometimes it's about "Mine is bigger than yours" from one photographer to another, just like cars and boats and houses :). I'm always thinking, if they need that for their confidence, let them do :).
Love your stuff Mike, mostly because your 'local' exploits are in areas I recognise. I live on the Isle of Wight. Before I retired I was a sign maker and, on this video, you are sitting outside a Lymington Harbour Coffee Shop where the blue signs behind you (and others in Quay Street) were done by me !!!!!! Thanks for the belated ad.................
Nice video, good message. I think that the "soft focus effect" in the portrait with the 16-55 WR versus a sharper result with the 18-55 may have been caused by the 1/40 shutter speed, handheld, combined with the lack of OIS in that lens.
How come your are so awesome... I just love the way your teach photography...especially composition videos. You let us know the whole situation and then help us get the right composition. Thanks a lot for your videos. Your videos are Blessing for any budding photographer. I'm from India and I'm proud to be in the same time and world where your are teaching. I dont have words to explain my gratitude.
another awesome video Mike..every time that I see a vid of this type from you, I settle down and quit looking at the newest, greatest gear out there..it is inspiring to see a pro creating top notch photos with (supposedly) low end equipment...it gives us hope...thanks again !
Awesome, thank you Abdul. I'm running a weekly photo competitiongroup during Lockdown. almost 3000 photographers of all levels having a great time and supporting each other. I think you'll love it. Link below explains everything... MIKE www.photographycourses.biz/photography-locked-down
Love what you do for photographers and the support your classes provide. I have always felt that the camera is only a tool...that the real image is created in your mind and your minds eye. Thanks for all you do. I watch you videos all the time. I have been an active photographer for over 40 years.I appreciate you truthfulness.
I finally found your channel again. I lost it after years. I still love your practical approach to things. People seem to forget what it's all about. Endless discussions about gear.
Thank you for posting this. I, myself, am a fan of "kit" lenses for exactly the same reasons. I know people who are so caught up into getting the "next best thing," that they forget to ask themselves "why?" I completely agree that it's better to save that money and use it to learn something new or different about your photography.
I was convinced my 28 70 kit lens was fine until i replaced it with a 24 70 carl zeis one. The difference is incredible. Over sharp lenses , ? Ha you my freind are having a laugh .
Mike- Great video-- I think the better argument here is not that the expensive lens is too sharp is that the cheaper lens takes as good a picture as the expensive lens. The sharpness detail you are talking about does not really show on the video. Thanks for all of the content you put out.
Mike: this video is a good example of why I have so much appreciated your videos. You apply a common sense filter to photography and hardware. I have recommended your videos to many people..with the idea of trying to keep them from getting side tracked with irrelevancies and enjoy the process (not the pixel count) Since I am on a budget I was forced to shoot older lens and cameras... and have come to appreciate how well they can perform. (one of my favorite combinations is a d300 with the older 75 to 150E lens... an amazing lens for as little as 50 bucks on ebay) One of my favorite episodes is when you ripped your pants and did the post it note after the fact. You are one of us.
Mike: Thank you so much for providing a comprehensive channel that is both informative and easy to understand for beginners like myself. Out of all the photography channels on TH-cam that i have viewed, yours is easily head and shoulders above the rest. Thank you again for your wonderful videos and unique teaching style. Much love from Canada.
Thank you Legend 115. I'm delighted they're helping. Please take a look on my website (link below) where all the videos on TH-cam are searchable by category and skill level and all have an accompanying free article with more info too. Some say it's easier to find what you need there rather than YT. If you sign up for my newsletter, I'll let you know the instant there's a new one and send you a weekly email where we'll revisit tips and techniques to encourage you to keep practicing. - MIKE :-) www.photographycourses.biz/videos
One of your best educational videos not only about photography but about being a better consumer! Save money or spend it in real knowledge not just more equipment. Epic!
Well, Thanks! You are by no means the first person to suggest that kit lenses can be "just as good", but your video is the first truly convincing demonstration of the claim that I have come across. Sure, it would be great to have first rate low light capability, but I wouldn't use it that often, I'd struggle to fund it and I'd hate to carry it all everywhere. Horses for courses they used to say. I would like to ask about your choice of tripod. I have actually had one of these for many years but ended up never taking it anywhere because it was too heavy/bulky. Oh, Happy New Year!
Mike, I agree wholeheartedly with your thoughts. I love using older glass, Helios, Jupiter, Fujinon, Chinon, Carl Zeiss etc,, The prime lenses of older M42/PK/Nik F variants can produce fantastic images, with great clarity and sharpness. The best part here is the cost, you can buy 4 or 5 decent vintage lenses, plus the required adaptor, for the cost of 1 new kit lens price.
I have been reminding myself not to become a sheep gazing on this super duper sharpness wave. Totally agree I tend to work on my composition and not always want that crazy unreal sharpness, particularly when I m shooting videos. Thanks for keeping us all sane.
boss, I am shooting MIKE-FLAT. I love it. Often I am shooting at night in a dark place so it is not very difficult to check for sharpness. But I was out and about with my lovely Mama yesterday where it was a sunny and sometimes I had trouble checking for sharpness. Quickly wanted to ask exactly how sharp you set the sharpness on your little Fuji, or whatever camera you may be using? because while my eyes are still excellent quality at this point in my lifespan, and I can just about make out what the LCD is telling me when I zoom in to check for sharpness in all the mega pixels one can achieve handheld during the daytime at 100iso as apposed to the meatball sized ones I check shooting handheld at night with iso running anywhere from 3200-51,000. What do I do? jack up the sharpness a tad for daytime. Or perhaps i set it lower by accident.
Hey iain. I leave it on the default setting which I believe is halfway up the slider in the menu. Any additional sharpening I do in Lr when developing the raw to an image file. So long as the focus is soft on and there's no movement it'll be sharp. But if not there's no way to sharpen an already soft picture because of these things... MIKE :-)
awesome. okay, MIKE-FLAT is below the default settings, but the images are easy to sharpen later in Lr. I will bump them a up a little closer to the middle if needed. Thanks!
Would you consider doing the test with RAW rather than jpeg exposures. I was wondering if the contrast differences were related to the camera software compression rather than the lenses.
I actually shot jpg and raw when I did the test but they looked the same. So I thought better keep it simple and just do basic jpegs on same picture control settings... MIKE
I am not too new to photography but new to DSLRs. After watching tons of videos about lenses on TH-cam I recently got a used Canon EF-S 18mm-135mm to go with my brand new Canon Rebel SL2. It is flexible enough zoom range and give me the shots I need. Also great for video work. Long story short I don't see a huge need for expensive lenses and I absolutely agree with your comments about newer vs. older lenses. You make most useful videos about teaching photography. Thank you!
I always look forward to any new videos from you Mike..of course I've watched your other ones over and over..you were my first "teacher" last year when I got back into photography..every time that I get an itch to buy new equipment, I just watch your videos when you use our kit lens and think "if it's good enough for Mike, I think I'm ok with what I have"..thanks for continuing to save me $ !
Top marks, Mike, because it's refreshing to see an honest review about this as there are so many that push the expensive lenses and forget that the results are often artificial. If a photo can tell a story, has a pleasing composition that leads the eye and lighting that makes it feel alive almost 3D you have a winner.
I wish I’d watched this BEFORE my husband and I spent way too much money on a couple of lenses!!! I asked for some advice from a photographer on Facebook, and now I feel as though he was really a “photographer snob.” On the other hand, I met another wonderful photographer who has done loads of beautiful work and has encouraged me to buy what works best for me and makes me happy. I have a very nice macro lens that has a wide aperture, but for everyday fun and versatility, I bought a zoom lens. Also, I’ve looked back at old photos using a “kit” lens, and I have many great shots. But, as you point out, learning about light, composition, and practicing have much more value than buying the latest and greatest!
You know what: That's what I'm doing right now. I'm saving up for a trip to Africa with my daughter. For basically every expense that I might make, I compare how long I could travel for that money. A fancy lens could easily cost me weeks of traveling. Sometimes, we just need some perspective.
Mike Browne funny thing is that I was on the fence about a lens I had recently purchased. I had spent a good bit of money but was not feeling 100% sold on it. It was a really good 24-70. After watching your video I went back to my kit lens and started working with it and sent the recently purchased 24-70 back. For now I didn’t really need it. We’ll see what the future holds. Thanks for your advice mike.
100% Agree Mike. The 18-55 is the one I would have as it would suit my needs completely. I don't need the water resistance or 2.8 throughout. Great video as per usual Mike. Your effort is as always very much appreciated.
Mike thank you for a great tutorial , I would love to know what what camera and lens your using for your video I love the detail . Please let me know thanks you mike....
great video as always mike. as an amature photographer i would be the first to admit that i have in the past been a little hung up about sharp images and equipment but just recently i have been using my 18.55 kit lens and found very little difference in image quality between 18.55mm kit lens and an expensive 17 40mm canon L lens. so your video mike will help me to get into the mind set of more images less aquipment better composition. thanks mike regards ray
Mike you are my Hero. I never really thought about an image being too sharp but you are totally right, The sharp flat screens you speak of also hurt my eyes and now I know why, it's not natural. I will be taking a closer look at my kit using your less is more insight. Thank you Mike.
Through the experience of learning photography, I've grown to love my Pentax Q system 23-70mm kit zoom the most, even though I own all the lenses in the system and it is the cheapest of the 4 autofocus lenses, and the one that gets the least love (although Larry Becker at B&H liked it, too). This video validates my opinion, and lets me know I'm not a (complete) know-nothing.
Great videos! What tripod is that you are using? It looks really strong. To me there is nothing in those photos that would justify the 1500 price compared to the 18-55.
Thanks Richard. It's a Benbo tripod, sorry I can't remember what model because I bought it about 24 years ago and the label's worn right off. The head's a super strong manfrotto, sadly discontinued now. ... MIKE
It's great to hear common sense in these matters. It disappoints many if us when we hear that same old song singing you need to upgrade. A lot of photographers are happy with good cost lens.
🙏 K.L. Yep, upgrading kit rarely makes any difference to how interesting the images are. Anyone shooting pre 1980's had the most basic of cameras and some of them took stunning images - Cariter-Bresson etc... It's much better and cheaper to upgrade our skills than our kit... MIKE
Some good points, but I think that light transmission in a lens can be important to look at (and not just aperture). If the lens is meant to be used for low light photography it might be pretty important, since cranking up the ISO might end up ruining the detail. Light transmission is normally a lot higher in primes, and this makes them a good choice in those situations (in my opinion).
@@MikeBrowne I share your website and experiences with so many people because you have helped me so much. I am looking forward to to attending your courses
Another super video. Many thanks for sharing. I currently shoot with a Nikon D750 & my camera kit is nearly complete. The one last lens I would like is a 70-200mm. The thing is I am about to become a Dad for the first time and so as you can imagine money has become a little tighter. I have spent hours wandering which 70-200mm lens to buy but with this video you have put a few of my hangups to bed and I now feel much more comfortable and confident about the lens I will choose. So thank you for that. - Adam
A while ago i picked up an old 70-210mm F4 on the back of this video from Angry Photographer th-cam.com/video/NRaT4qfQ-VM/w-d-xo.html I got mine from ebay for £120 and it was in pristine imaculate condition. No its not a 2.8 but thats no big deal for me. The pictures i get are amazing, really very nice indeed. I have young children also so £1500 plus lenses are out for me!
Adam Blackman Photography. Consider a 70-300. They have a varying maximum aperture, but a bit more reach. Doesn't have to be Nikon. I would insist on stabilisation though. Also, consider used. Someone will get Mike's at a huge discount from what he paid.
Kit is important, and finding the right kit is like finding that elusive great shot. Which is why we love photography. "Everything is effected by you" , is coming to all my shoots now great lesson!
Mike Browne when you shoot the cabins I've seen almost exact image (or location) used by TH-camrs as a reference to test smartphone display 😉 did you make in the past a famous shot like the one in the video? Maybe I'm wrong, don't know if there are similar locations with cabin in your video 😅👍
The 18-55 is F/2.8/4 not F/2.8/5.6 as mentioned in the video. The biggest advantage for me of the 16-55 is the extra 2mm on the wide end, doesn't sound much but it's amazing how much more you can capture. Just for reference though, I'd take the 18-55 because of price/performance is as good if not better than that of the 16-55.
Thanks Vikram. I can only talk about the kit i have and TBH, I'm not great at kit reviews because I'm not that interested in it. As long as i can capture a moment and create a vision I don't really care what is used to do it... MIKE
Just watched this video and may I add that back in the ( swinging ) 60's we used to use soft focus filters or a stocking over the lens to soften the image especially when taking portraiture, now its all about how sharp is the lens. Also what was in vogue at the time was "grain" the more grainy you could make your photos the cooler they where. I think trends and traits just come and go BUT good photos will stand the test of time and last forever
When i moved to Fuji thought i needed the 16-55 but soon realised how good this kit one is, a previous video you did helped me with the decision when you had to buy the 16-55. Interesting view point about over sharpness. I also love using my old Olympus primes on the XT-2. Stephen
Thank you for this video Mike! The kit you use is only a tool to create a vision. As long as you can m communicate the vision, who cares what equipment you use! Cheers!
Totally agree Mike, One of my favourite lenses is my 28-155 kit lens (for Pentax). Its a brute of a lens, super quick to focus, with a clutch, so I can override the auto if I want with a quick pull back. Also its WR, so when I kick my tripod over and it goes in the Thames its fine, or sill beer on it as I've done a few times, also I shoot street and prefer longer DOF so I don't need the "pro wide apature" f6.3 this bad boy is a beast and it was only £45 second hand. I also have loads of old school manual glass ecause like you say, it just feels right to the eye
I love your modesty and how real you come across on the subject. While we all know the perks of high end gear, lenses, etc, we all forget that it is the photo that ultimately wins. Same things with instruments where you can get for example a great drummer to play the hell out of a cheap drum kit.
Mike, One thing I noticed when you were showing the images on LR, is that they had different histograms. The colors on the kit lens seemed more pronounced then on the more expensive lens. The curves for each color looked different between the two. I think it is the color profile that is looking different to you. But at the very least it gives a quantifiable way to compare the two images.
Hi Carla . Agree with Melissa. Different focal lengths give different looks and feels to an image besides making far off things come closer. Maybe cover a range of between 10 and 200mm. The camera only records what you tell it to on a sensor so which you use won't make any difference to how interesting the photos are. Have a look at this video which should help explain... MIKE www.photographycourses.biz/videos/technical/lenses/Focal-Length-Explained-Pt1
The 18-55 kit lens is amazingly sharp and delivers quality results. I bought a nikon dx 17-55 f2.8 for about £475 assuming it would be better than the kit lens, but found that the kit lens performed better in pretty much every scenario. And similar to Mike in his video, the kit lens is much lighter at about 150g compared to 900g for the 17-55. For a crop sensor body like the d5300, the 18-55mm kit lens would be my go to, even though I've had the fortune of being able to play with quite a few lenses. In my opinion and personal experience, you (probably) already have one of the best zoom lenses.
Carla Lapadula It depends what you want to take indoors. If you want to do studio portraits, then having some speed lights give you as much light as you need and the wider aperture doesn't provide any value. In good, strong light I find the kit lens to be razor sharp. You should ONLY buy a lens with a bigger aperture if and only if that aperture is completely necessary.
Thanks. I'm sorry but never used Sony stills camera and don't know much about them, other than Sony lenses are excellent so don't worry about quality... MIKE
Hi Mike, i am an enthusiast / hobbyist and also have the XT1 with the 18-55, i love this camera and with the (WYSIWYG) has helped me move on from shooting in Auto Mode. As to your video i was uplifted with your comparison test, ie, how much we can save on lenses, you are the first pro photographer, and i watch many on youtube to mention the lens sharpness issue !!, to be truthful both lense images looked pretty much the same to me, but my eyes are several decades old now !!. Also i have become interested in close up photography but fuji prime lenses are quite steep pricewise for me, so i bought the metabones fuji/nikon adapter and bought old Ai - S Nikon 24mm, 50mm and 105mm micro lenses, with a 52.5mm macro tube, all on ebay in great condition ( all manual lenses, but that's not a problem as i will be shooting closeup in manual ). With the the 105 & tube i can get a 1:1 ratio, all this for about half the price of the fuji 60mm macro, excuse me for going on, but a big thank you for all your great informative videos.
Great comparison Mike...👍 In your opinion is it worth to invest in 50mm F2.8 prime lens for food photography, or 18-55mm can do the trick with some practice..?
hi Vivek Bhagwan Patil , 50mm prime is a worth investment, but invest on yourself first, know your camera and maximize on what it can do using your creative juice - Melissa pp Mike
Mike as always great video and I think it's appropriate for my question. I have an up coming trip to the Normandy coast and northern part of France. I have a Nikon D7000 with the standard assortment of lenses. Recently I purchased a Nikon 18 - 200 lens. I was wondering in your wisdom should this one lens suffice? The majority of shots I plan on taking will be landscape type shots with the odd portait of my wife and maybe some village market shots/daily living ones as well. Your thoughts on this would be appreciated. Thanks Randall
Hi, this lens will suffice, it's perfect for taking candid photos for streeet photography, portraits, using the 18mm side of it is perfect for landscapes and photojournalism style photos - Melissa pp Mike
I like the energy in all of your videos. So much to learn. As far as changing lenses is concerned, I bought myself a cheap ebay lens-flipper. Made my life so much easier.
Love your comment about being a photographer and stop worrying about your kit. It has been such a stumbling block. That said, If it comes to purchasing a 24mm f/2.8 lens and a 24mm f/1.4, I’ll gladly purchase the one with the wider aperture, all other factors being equal.
It's absolutely about what you need. Spending a ton of money doesn't make you a good photographer, it just makes taking great photos easier. You still need to know what you are doing. My latest purchase was the Sigma 100-400 f/5-6.3, I was looking for something longer than 200mm for my animal photography. It cost me about 800€. I could have spent more, I could have spent less. I simply got this lens because it fits my needs. I did my reasearch before buying it and I'm happy with it. It does exactly what I need. This lens might be a bad example for what you are talking about though because when you go longer than 200mm the lenses become very expensive very quickly...
I recently (2-3 months ago) upgraded to a constant f/2.8 zoom from a lighter constant f/4 lens. I like the old one, it is light, has excellent image quality, except at the wide end the corners were unappealing. The new one is excellent but much more heavier, gives me extra light and the corners are much nicer looking, even though the f/4 had a sharper image all-around. Plus it has WR which for me a welcome feature. I will stay with the heavier f/2.8 but still keep the old f/4 around just for a lighter travel kit. As far as sharpness goes, the center is crazy sharp on the new lens as well as on the old one, but the new one has a nicer, more smooth falloff in sharpness to the corners and nice smooth boke. It is a very nice lens for portraits and stopped down it is sharp throughout the frame with good depth and a touch of "dreaminess". I think I found the right lens for my usual shooting style. Happy New Year!
Well Mike I finally made the jump this year and got rid of my Nikon D800e and 610 with accompanying 4 heavy lenses that I used for my landscapes. Now got the XT2 16-55mm (Too sharp) & 50-140mm that's it! (Ive commented on this before) Of course I miss my big dslr's but not the weight. It took a long time, all of last year, and yours and others videos to convince me. At 64 yrs, big hands, wee Scottish brain, and not a lot of patience I was struggling with the weight I was carrying so decisions had to be made!! I did the side by side comparison of course as others have done, between my D800e and the XT2 through the iso ranges and as expected the D800e was slightly better but not by much! Lightroom was a bugger with the X-trans files but got round that with Iridient and after that I was really surprised. With my old eyes I couldn't tell the difference!! Once you learn that you have to edit slightly differently with the files produced by the XT-2 Brilliant. Your right its not about the kit or gear its getting out there and doing pictures and learning to adapt. Jim
Good on you Jim. Interesting, I have heard folks say they have problems with X-trans files in Lightroom but I've never had a problem. Enjoy the XT-1 buddy... MIKE
Mike , you are the camera producers nightmare! You have the knowledge and understanding that ridicules the entire regime of " you need to buy this , upgrade now!!!! Or your photos will be shit ! " great , i applaud you .
What he just said!...Julian
I agree too! Down to earth common sense. That's our Mike!
Mike, Thanks for making us a better consumer. Appreciate your effort.
Mike, since you have paid for it anyway, it might be wiser to just keep the more expensive lens as a backup lens for your out of town workshops, just in case something happens to your cheaper lens again some day? Then you will never be without a lens again in case of another mishap.
So much money and time spent on equipment and lenses that offer tiny improvements. We should all be more focused on using our own abilities to improve our photography, not let technology do it for us!
YES - thanks Overseer 13 - MIKE :-)
Thank you Mike, I am so glad I take your advice!
The 18-55 “kit” lens has been lauded by many as a superior lens. Fuji X-mount shooters are really lucky to have this option for great photo quality. I bought an X-T2 and later traded it for an X-T3. I bought the body only and purchased the 16-55. I have some other lenses but fell so much in love with the 16-55 that I rarely take it off. “Too sharp” has never crossed my mind. Having a fixed aperture with actual markings on the lens is a wonderful thing.
I recently bought an X-E3 as a “walking around” camera. I bought it with the 18-55 lens. That combination is fantastic for going out and about and not carrying a lot of weight. It’s really good for “street photography” (or any photography where you don’t want to look like a professional photographer and everyone hides from you).
I’ve done the side-by-side comparisons and it is amazing how close in quality the two lenses are for the “average” shot at f5.6. Your photos showed this well. But I submit this for your consideration: There is an old saying that you shouldn’t take a picture, you should make a picture. I think the 16-55 lens has a lot more options for the person who wants to “make” a picture.
I’m lucky to be able to afford both. For someone on a budget, they can’t go wrong with the 18-55. For someone who shoots “auto” or close to it, the 18-55 will work very well. For the person who wants more options for creativity and does like the extra sharpness afforded by the 16-55, it is a better lens.
Love your approach to photography and your personality, Mike. Great video, thanks for the perspective.
You are so right in what you say Mike, I shoot events for a local newspaper and at all of the events I photograph I am along side newspaper photographers with Nikon D5 cameras with very expensive lenses. I however use a Nikon D300 and a D300s usually with an 18-200mm lens. When the photographs are published in our respective publications you would be hard pressed to differentiate between the cameras that took the image.
Thanks Bob Edwards. That sounds about right... MIKE :-)
Well, Bob, I think sometimes it's about "Mine is bigger than yours" from one photographer to another, just like cars and boats and houses :). I'm always thinking, if they need that for their confidence, let them do :).
or nuke buttons... ;-)
Love your stuff Mike, mostly because your 'local' exploits are in areas I recognise. I live on the Isle of Wight.
Before I retired I was a sign maker and, on this video, you are sitting outside a Lymington Harbour Coffee Shop where the blue signs behind you (and others in Quay Street) were done by me !!!!!!
Thanks for the belated ad.................
Thanks - and you're welcome Dave 🙏😊
Nice video, good message. I think that the "soft focus effect" in the portrait with the 16-55 WR versus a sharper result with the 18-55 may have been caused by the 1/40 shutter speed, handheld, combined with the lack of OIS in that lens.
How come your are so awesome... I just love the way your teach photography...especially composition videos. You let us know the whole situation and then help us get the right composition. Thanks a lot for your videos. Your videos are Blessing for any budding photographer. I'm from India and I'm proud to be in the same time and world where your are teaching. I dont have words to explain my gratitude.
Thank you Harsh Vardhan Saboo - that's praise indeed ... MIKE :-)
Ditto
another awesome video Mike..every time that I see a vid of this type from you, I settle down and quit looking at the newest, greatest gear out there..it is inspiring to see a pro creating top notch photos with (supposedly) low end equipment...it gives us hope...thanks again !
What a refreshing photography channel. This is the third video Ive watched and I have loved them all. Subscribed.
Awesome, thank you Abdul. I'm running a weekly photo competitiongroup during Lockdown. almost 3000 photographers of all levels having a great time and supporting each other. I think you'll love it. Link below explains everything... MIKE
www.photographycourses.biz/photography-locked-down
Love what you do for photographers and the support your classes provide. I have always felt that the camera is only a tool...that the real image is created in your mind and your minds eye. Thanks for all you do. I watch you videos all the time. I have been an active photographer for over 40 years.I appreciate you truthfulness.
Hi Mike just starting out in proper picture taking. Glad found your channel and thank you for sharing
Good to here Dave, take a look here for more support www.photographycourses.biz/courses
I finally found your channel again. I lost it after years.
I still love your practical approach to things. People seem to forget what it's all about.
Endless discussions about gear.
Totally agree Mike,,,, well done sir,,, thanks again, Bob
Thank you for posting this. I, myself, am a fan of "kit" lenses for exactly the same reasons. I know people who are so caught up into getting the "next best thing," that they forget to ask themselves "why?" I completely agree that it's better to save that money and use it to learn something new or different about your photography.
Thanks Wooden Canoe Pictures - MIKE
I was convinced my 28 70 kit lens was fine until i replaced it with a 24 70 carl zeis one. The difference is incredible. Over sharp lenses , ? Ha you my freind are having a laugh .
Mike- Great video-- I think the better argument here is not that the expensive lens is too sharp is that the cheaper lens takes as good a picture as the expensive lens. The sharpness detail you are talking about does not really show on the video. Thanks for all of the content you put out.
Yep,,,,, got to agree Mike,,,,, well said mate thanks again, Bob
Excellent video Mike, Thank you
You're very welcome Andre
Thanks for the thoughtful comparison Mike. Makes the point very clearly that the kit is only a small part of the picture making process.
Mike, you are fantastic. A real pleasure to watch.
Thanks Evian.. MIKE
Mike: this video is a good example of why I have so much appreciated your videos. You apply a common sense filter to photography and hardware. I have recommended your videos to many people..with the idea of trying to keep them from getting side tracked with irrelevancies and enjoy the process (not the pixel count) Since I am on a budget I was forced to shoot older lens and cameras... and have come to appreciate how well they can perform. (one of my favorite combinations is a d300 with the older 75 to 150E lens... an amazing lens for as little as 50 bucks on ebay) One of my favorite episodes is when you ripped your pants and did the post it note after the fact. You are one of us.
Thanks Gary. Yep I'm still good at ripping my pants, falling over in puddles, knocking stuff over... MIKE :-)
Mike: Thank you so much for providing a comprehensive channel that is both informative and easy to understand for beginners like myself. Out of all the photography channels on TH-cam that i have viewed, yours is easily head and shoulders above the rest. Thank you again for your wonderful videos and unique teaching style. Much love from Canada.
Thank you Legend 115. I'm delighted they're helping. Please take a look on my website (link below) where all the videos on TH-cam are searchable by category and skill level and all have an accompanying free article with more info too. Some say it's easier to find what you need there rather than YT. If you sign up for my newsletter, I'll let you know the instant there's a new one and send you a weekly email where we'll revisit tips and techniques to encourage you to keep practicing. - MIKE :-)
www.photographycourses.biz/videos
I love the photo on your other screen ........ The one taken in Cairo ........Wish you had a nice time in my city
Thank you Mohamed.... I do love experience all our world has to offer!
Image Stabilization on a lens is really useful . Specially as I do hand held videos too
Wonderfully explained. Many thanks.
One of your best educational videos not only about photography but about being a better consumer! Save money or spend it in real knowledge not just more equipment. Epic!
thank you Reb C, please do share it too so we can make more - Melissa
Thanks for the advice
Thank you! Great advice my friend!
You bring such a unique perspective, worth watching just for that
Thanks Christian, I appreciate your comment.
Spot-on Mike!
I like your presentation style, no gimmicks, just straight forward info and content.
All the best for 2018
You too Colin - MIKE :-)
Well, Thanks! You are by no means the first person to suggest that kit lenses can be "just as good", but your video is the first truly convincing demonstration of the claim that I have come across. Sure, it would be great to have first rate low light capability, but I wouldn't use it that often, I'd struggle to fund it and I'd hate to carry it all everywhere. Horses for courses they used to say.
I would like to ask about your choice of tripod. I have actually had one of these for many years but ended up never taking it anywhere because it was too heavy/bulky.
Oh, Happy New Year!
Thanks David and Happy New Year to you too. Yep that old Benbo has been working hard for me for over 20 years and still going strong... MIKE :-)
God Bless you Mike, you are an excellent teacher.......full of life.....
Thanks again Dr. ShahZadah... MIKE
Mike, I agree wholeheartedly with your thoughts. I love using older glass, Helios, Jupiter, Fujinon, Chinon, Carl Zeiss etc,, The prime lenses of older M42/PK/Nik F variants can produce fantastic images, with great clarity and sharpness. The best part here is the cost, you can buy 4 or 5 decent vintage lenses, plus the required adaptor, for the cost of 1 new kit lens price.
Great video Mike, and I agree with what you say wholeheartedly......
In all honesty for the price of the 16-55 2.8 you can get the 18-55 & 55-200! & the versatility goes up significantly!.
Agreed Stephen. - MIKE
I have been reminding myself not to become a sheep gazing on this super duper sharpness wave. Totally agree I tend to work on my composition and not always want that crazy unreal sharpness, particularly when I m shooting videos. Thanks for keeping us all sane.
boss, I am shooting MIKE-FLAT. I love it.
Often I am shooting at night in a dark place so it is not very difficult to check for sharpness. But I was out and about with my lovely Mama yesterday where it was a sunny and sometimes I had trouble checking for sharpness. Quickly wanted to ask exactly how sharp you set the sharpness on your little Fuji, or whatever camera you may be using? because while my eyes are still excellent quality at this point in my lifespan, and I can just about make out what the LCD is telling me when I zoom in to check for sharpness in all the mega pixels one can achieve handheld during the daytime at 100iso as apposed to the meatball sized ones I check shooting handheld at night with iso running anywhere from 3200-51,000. What do I do? jack up the sharpness a tad for daytime. Or perhaps i set it lower by accident.
Hey iain. I leave it on the default setting which I believe is halfway up the slider in the menu. Any additional sharpening I do in Lr when developing the raw to an image file. So long as the focus is soft on and there's no movement it'll be sharp. But if not there's no way to sharpen an already soft picture because of these things... MIKE :-)
awesome. okay, MIKE-FLAT is below the default settings, but the images are easy to sharpen later in Lr. I will bump them a up a little closer to the middle if needed. Thanks!
Would you consider doing the test with RAW rather than jpeg exposures. I was wondering if the contrast differences were related to the camera software compression rather than the lenses.
I actually shot jpg and raw when I did the test but they looked the same. So I thought better keep it simple and just do basic jpegs on same picture control settings... MIKE
An intelligent and helpful assessment - thanks.
Mike! You're back! I've missed your videos!
I am not too new to photography but new to DSLRs. After watching tons of videos about lenses on TH-cam I recently got a used Canon EF-S 18mm-135mm to go with my brand new Canon Rebel SL2. It is flexible enough zoom range and give me the shots I need. Also great for video work.
Long story short I don't see a huge need for expensive lenses and I absolutely agree with your comments about newer vs. older lenses. You make most useful videos about teaching photography.
Thank you!
Thank you Soydan, indeed you are correct. - Melissa pp Mike :)
I always look forward to any new videos from you Mike..of course I've watched your other ones over and over..you were my first "teacher" last year when I got back into photography..every time that I get an itch to buy new equipment, I just watch your videos when you use our kit lens and think "if it's good enough for Mike, I think I'm ok with what I have"..thanks for continuing to save me $ !
Love it! Think you are spot-on with this.
Thanks Justin ... MB🙏😊
lovely video as always! thank you
great thoughts and video Mike.
Top marks, Mike, because it's refreshing to see an honest review about this as there are so many that push the expensive lenses and forget that the results are often artificial. If a photo can tell a story, has a pleasing composition that leads the eye and lighting that makes it feel alive almost 3D you have a winner.
I wish I’d watched this BEFORE my husband and I spent way too much money on a couple of lenses!!! I asked for some advice from a photographer on Facebook, and now I feel as though he was really a “photographer snob.” On the other hand, I met another wonderful photographer who has done loads of beautiful work and has encouraged me to buy what works best for me and makes me happy. I have a very nice macro lens that has a wide aperture, but for everyday fun and versatility, I bought a zoom lens. Also, I’ve looked back at old photos using a “kit” lens, and I have many great shots. But, as you point out, learning about light, composition, and practicing have much more value than buying the latest and greatest!
Yes sadly there are quite a lot of "“photographer snobs” about @Anne Harwood... MIKE
Mike thank you for all you share, good man.
I just recently discovered your TH-cam channel... I have been enjoying watching your videos. You are extremely knowledgable
thank you kimberly! please do share our videos too so we can make more - Melissa pp Mike
Another great and informative video thanks mike
Mike, I need to make sure to watch your videos every time I'm contemplating buying new stuff. :-) Keep up the great work!
jbxplores spend the money you save on a road trip for photos.
You know what: That's what I'm doing right now. I'm saving up for a trip to Africa with my daughter. For basically every expense that I might make, I compare how long I could travel for that money. A fancy lens could easily cost me weeks of traveling. Sometimes, we just need some perspective.
Great video mike. What about shooting mainly indoors in lower light. Is the 2.8 better?
As I said in the video TrueMusicMaking, the 18-55 has excellent stabilisation and the 16-55 doesn't so one pretty much cancels out the other ... MIKE
Mike Browne funny thing is that I was on the fence about a lens I had recently purchased. I had spent a good bit of money but was not feeling 100% sold on it. It was a really good 24-70. After watching your video I went back to my kit lens and started working with it and sent the recently purchased 24-70 back. For now I didn’t really need it. We’ll see what the future holds. Thanks for your advice mike.
Great sir, I like the way you explain it. Very good tutorial.
100% Agree Mike. The 18-55 is the one I would have as it would suit my needs completely. I don't need the water resistance or 2.8 throughout. Great video as per usual Mike. Your effort is as always very much appreciated.
Thanks again Jeff
Mike thank you for a great tutorial , I would love to know what what camera and lens your using for your video I love the detail . Please let me know thanks you mike....
Thank you @Thoma Lavery. this one and most others are shot on a Sony PXW-X70. Link below... MIKE
pro.sony/en_GB/products/handheld-camcorders/pxw-x70
great video as always mike. as an amature photographer i would be the first to admit that i have in the past been a little
hung up about sharp images and equipment but just recently i have been using my 18.55 kit lens and found very little
difference in image quality between 18.55mm kit lens and an expensive 17 40mm canon L lens. so your video mike
will help me to get into the mind set of more images less aquipment better composition. thanks mike regards ray
Thanks Ray. "more images less equipment better composition" is a great mantra - MIKE :-)
Mike you are my Hero. I never really thought about an image being too sharp but you are totally right, The sharp flat screens you speak of also hurt my eyes and now I know why, it's not natural. I will be taking a closer look at my kit using your less is more insight.
Thank you Mike.
thank you Drew :) -Melissa pp Mike
Through the experience of learning photography, I've grown to love my Pentax Q system 23-70mm kit zoom the most, even though I own all the lenses in the system and it is the cheapest of the 4 autofocus lenses, and the one that gets the least love (although Larry Becker at B&H liked it, too). This video validates my opinion, and lets me know I'm not a (complete) know-nothing.
Very much enjoyed your video. BTW, hope you got your glasses you left on the table at start of video.
Great videos! What tripod is that you are using? It looks really strong. To me there is nothing in those photos that would justify the 1500 price compared to the 18-55.
Thanks Richard. It's a Benbo tripod, sorry I can't remember what model because I bought it about 24 years ago and the label's worn right off. The head's a super strong manfrotto, sadly discontinued now. ... MIKE
Great video mate. I thought I’d watched all the videos on the 18-55... yours was one of the best!
Thanks Nicholas. Please share it around with other photographers as it'll help me make more videos like it... MIKE
Great stuff Mike, another top video!
It's great to hear common sense in these matters. It disappoints many if us when we hear that same old song singing you need to upgrade. A lot of photographers are happy with good cost lens.
🙏 K.L. Yep, upgrading kit rarely makes any difference to how interesting the images are. Anyone shooting pre 1980's had the most basic of cameras and some of them took stunning images - Cariter-Bresson etc... It's much better and cheaper to upgrade our skills than our kit... MIKE
Thank you
Some good points, but I think that light transmission in a lens can be important to look at (and not just aperture). If the lens is meant to be used for low light photography it might be pretty important, since cranking up the ISO might end up ruining the detail. Light transmission is normally a lot higher in primes, and this makes them a good choice in those situations (in my opinion).
Completely agree with you Mike.
Thanks Martin - I appreciate the support.
@@MikeBrowne I share your website and experiences with so many people because you have helped me so much. I am looking forward to to attending your courses
Thank you so much for the video, I have bin missing this type of video's.
Again a really brilliant video from you Mike 100 thanks for all you do for us that have so much to learn from you
all the best to you
Regards
Thomas
Another super video. Many thanks for sharing.
I currently shoot with a Nikon D750 & my camera kit is nearly complete. The one last lens I would like is a 70-200mm. The thing is I am about to become a Dad for the first time and so as you can imagine money has become a little tighter. I have spent hours wandering which 70-200mm lens to buy but with this video you have put a few of my hangups to bed and I now feel much more comfortable and confident about the lens I will choose. So thank you for that. - Adam
Congratulations Adam and you're welcome. Happy to help... MIKE :-)
A while ago i picked up an old 70-210mm F4 on the back of this video from Angry Photographer th-cam.com/video/NRaT4qfQ-VM/w-d-xo.html I got mine from ebay for £120 and it was in pristine imaculate condition. No its not a 2.8 but thats no big deal for me. The pictures i get are amazing, really very nice indeed. I have young children also so £1500 plus lenses are out for me!
Adam Blackman Photography. Consider a 70-300. They have a varying maximum aperture, but a bit more reach. Doesn't have to be Nikon. I would insist on stabilisation though. Also, consider used. Someone will get Mike's at a huge discount from what he paid.
Kit is important, and finding the right kit is like finding that elusive great shot. Which is why we love photography. "Everything is effected by you" , is coming to all my shoots now great lesson!
Hey but I've seen the cabins shot on most tech reviewer video while testing smartphone display color. :) is it the same location of the famous photo?
Sorry Mike I don't understand your question. Which reviewer video and what famous photo? ... MIKE
Mike Browne when you shoot the cabins I've seen almost exact image (or location) used by TH-camrs as a reference to test smartphone display 😉 did you make in the past a famous shot like the one in the video? Maybe I'm wrong, don't know if there are similar locations with cabin in your video 😅👍
Great informative video Mike.
Good to see that it's not all about the equipment.. it's about the person behind it!
Thanks Mike Crawshaw. Cameras don't take pictures - the person behind it does... MIKE
Excellent insight sir
The 18-55 is F/2.8/4 not F/2.8/5.6 as mentioned in the video. The biggest advantage for me of the 16-55 is the extra 2mm on the wide end, doesn't sound much but it's amazing how much more you can capture. Just for reference though, I'd take the 18-55 because of price/performance is as good if not better than that of the 16-55.
Very informative with a proof. How about doing more of such videos for different types of lenses? Always love your videos.
Thanks Vikram. I can only talk about the kit i have and TBH, I'm not great at kit reviews because I'm not that interested in it. As long as i can capture a moment and create a vision I don't really care what is used to do it... MIKE
Mike, yet again a very good video which is delivered in terms I understand.
Just watched this video and may I add that back in the ( swinging ) 60's we used to use soft focus filters or a stocking over the lens to soften the image especially when taking portraiture, now its all about how sharp is the lens. Also what was in vogue at the time was "grain" the more grainy you could make your photos the cooler they where. I think trends and traits just come and go BUT good photos will stand the test of time and last forever
Great video as always,Thanks Magnificent Mike!😍😍😍😍😍
When i moved to Fuji thought i needed the 16-55 but soon realised how good this kit one is, a previous video you did helped me with the decision when you had to buy the 16-55. Interesting view point about over sharpness. I also love using my old Olympus primes on the XT-2. Stephen
Thank you for this video Mike! The kit you use is only a tool to create a vision. As long as you can m communicate the vision, who cares what equipment you use! Cheers!
"The kit you use is only a tool to create a vision" YES - MIKE
Totally agree Mike, One of my favourite lenses is my 28-155 kit lens (for Pentax). Its a brute of a lens, super quick to focus, with a clutch, so I can override the auto if I want with a quick pull back. Also its WR, so when I kick my tripod over and it goes in the Thames its fine, or sill beer on it as I've done a few times, also I shoot street and prefer longer DOF so I don't need the "pro wide apature" f6.3 this bad boy is a beast and it was only £45 second hand. I also have loads of old school manual glass ecause like you say, it just feels right to the eye
I love your modesty and how real you come across on the subject. While we all know the perks of high end gear, lenses, etc, we all forget that it is the photo that ultimately wins. Same things with instruments where you can get for example a great drummer to play the hell out of a cheap drum kit.
thank you makemarker, really love your comment - Melissa pp Mike
Mike, One thing I noticed when you were showing the images on LR, is that they had different histograms. The colors on the kit lens seemed more pronounced then on the more expensive lens. The curves for each color looked different between the two. I think it is the color profile that is looking different to you. But at the very least it gives a quantifiable way to compare the two images.
Missed you, man. Glad to see you again.
Love your videos! What zoom lenses do you recommend for a D5300?
hi carla, depends on what kind of photography you will do. Melissa pp Mike
Hi Carla . Agree with Melissa. Different focal lengths give different looks and feels to an image besides making far off things come closer. Maybe cover a range of between 10 and 200mm. The camera only records what you tell it to on a sensor so which you use won't make any difference to how interesting the photos are. Have a look at this video which should help explain... MIKE
www.photographycourses.biz/videos/technical/lenses/Focal-Length-Explained-Pt1
The 18-55 kit lens is amazingly sharp and delivers quality results. I bought a nikon dx 17-55 f2.8 for about £475 assuming it would be better than the kit lens, but found that the kit lens performed better in pretty much every scenario. And similar to Mike in his video, the kit lens is much lighter at about 150g compared to 900g for the 17-55. For a crop sensor body like the d5300, the 18-55mm kit lens would be my go to, even though I've had the fortune of being able to play with quite a few lenses. In my opinion and personal experience, you (probably) already have one of the best zoom lenses.
Thanks! I was wandering if the Sigma 17-55mm 2.8 would be a good option for indoors.
Carla Lapadula It depends what you want to take indoors. If you want to do studio portraits, then having some speed lights give you as much light as you need and the wider aperture doesn't provide any value. In good, strong light I find the kit lens to be razor sharp. You should ONLY buy a lens with a bigger aperture if and only if that aperture is completely necessary.
Is Tilly available for assignments...?
Very sorry we never got around to commenting at the time! (Probably yes)
Great video thanks, I'm looking at getting a wide angle for my Sony A7 any suggestions thanks 👍🏻
Thanks. I'm sorry but never used Sony stills camera and don't know much about them, other than Sony lenses are excellent so don't worry about quality... MIKE
Hi Mike, i am an enthusiast / hobbyist and also have the XT1 with the 18-55, i love this camera and with the (WYSIWYG) has helped me move on from shooting in Auto Mode. As to your video i was uplifted with your comparison test, ie, how much we can save on lenses, you are the first pro photographer, and i watch many on youtube to mention the lens sharpness issue !!, to be truthful both lense images looked pretty much the same to me, but my eyes are several decades old now !!. Also i have become interested in close up photography but fuji prime lenses are quite steep pricewise for me, so i bought the metabones fuji/nikon adapter and bought old Ai - S Nikon 24mm, 50mm and 105mm micro lenses, with a 52.5mm macro tube, all on ebay in great condition ( all manual lenses, but that's not a problem as i will be shooting closeup in manual ). With the the 105 & tube i can get a 1:1 ratio, all this for about half the price of the fuji 60mm macro, excuse me for going on, but a big thank you for all your great informative videos.
Thanks Peter... MIKE :-)
Great comparison Mike...👍 In your opinion is it worth to invest in 50mm F2.8 prime lens for food photography, or 18-55mm can do the trick with some practice..?
hi Vivek Bhagwan Patil , 50mm prime is a worth investment, but invest on yourself first, know your camera and maximize on what it can do using your creative juice - Melissa pp Mike
To put things in to perspective, just imagine Annie Leibovitz fretting about which lens she should buy!
Lovely comparison. I like it.
Mike as always great video and I think it's appropriate for my question. I have an up coming trip to the Normandy coast and northern part of France. I have a Nikon D7000 with the standard assortment of lenses. Recently I purchased a Nikon 18 - 200 lens. I was wondering in your wisdom should this one lens suffice? The majority of shots I plan on taking will be landscape type shots with the odd portait of my wife and maybe some village market shots/daily living ones as well. Your thoughts on this would be appreciated.
Thanks Randall
Hi, this lens will suffice, it's perfect for taking candid photos for streeet photography, portraits, using the 18mm side of it is perfect for landscapes and photojournalism style photos - Melissa pp Mike
Well said Mike, keep making great videos like this!
I like the energy in all of your videos. So much to learn. As far as changing lenses is concerned, I bought myself a cheap ebay lens-flipper. Made my life so much easier.
Love your comment about being a photographer and stop worrying about your kit. It has been such a stumbling block.
That said, If it comes to purchasing a 24mm f/2.8 lens and a 24mm f/1.4, I’ll gladly purchase the one with the wider aperture, all other factors being equal.
It's absolutely about what you need. Spending a ton of money doesn't make you a good photographer, it just makes taking great photos easier. You still need to know what you are doing.
My latest purchase was the Sigma 100-400 f/5-6.3, I was looking for something longer than 200mm for my animal photography. It cost me about 800€. I could have spent more, I could have spent less. I simply got this lens because it fits my needs. I did my reasearch before buying it and I'm happy with it. It does exactly what I need.
This lens might be a bad example for what you are talking about though because when you go longer than 200mm the lenses become very expensive very quickly...
I recently (2-3 months ago) upgraded to a constant f/2.8 zoom from a lighter constant f/4 lens. I like the old one, it is light, has excellent image quality, except at the wide end the corners were unappealing. The new one is excellent but much more heavier, gives me extra light and the corners are much nicer looking, even though the f/4 had a sharper image all-around. Plus it has WR which for me a welcome feature. I will stay with the heavier f/2.8 but still keep the old f/4 around just for a lighter travel kit.
As far as sharpness goes, the center is crazy sharp on the new lens as well as on the old one, but the new one has a nicer, more smooth falloff in sharpness to the corners and nice smooth boke. It is a very nice lens for portraits and stopped down it is sharp throughout the frame with good depth and a touch of "dreaminess". I think I found the right lens for my usual shooting style.
Happy New Year!
Well Mike I finally made the jump this year and got rid of my Nikon D800e and 610 with accompanying 4 heavy lenses that I used for my landscapes. Now got the XT2 16-55mm (Too sharp) & 50-140mm that's it! (Ive commented on this before)
Of course I miss my big dslr's but not the weight. It took a long time, all of last year, and yours and others videos to convince me. At 64 yrs, big hands, wee Scottish brain, and not a lot of patience I was struggling with the weight I was carrying so decisions had to be made!!
I did the side by side comparison of course as others have done, between my D800e and the XT2 through the iso ranges and as expected the D800e was slightly better but not by much!
Lightroom was a bugger with the X-trans files but got round that with Iridient and after that I was really surprised. With my old eyes I couldn't tell the difference!! Once you learn that you have to edit slightly differently with the files produced by the XT-2 Brilliant. Your right its not about the kit or gear its getting out there and doing pictures and learning to adapt.
Jim
Good on you Jim. Interesting, I have heard folks say they have problems with X-trans files in Lightroom but I've never had a problem. Enjoy the XT-1 buddy... MIKE
Mike Browne thanks Mike keep up the good work 👍