I find Practical Photography (printed in UK) much better than the Popular Photography. I used to be reading it (some parts of it) regularly several years ago (1999-2000 or so), but then I found that I see less and less new material in it. I concluded that on one hand the content of that magazine was somewhat cyclic (i.e. repetitive), and on another hand, I was overgrowing it.
There were two favorite parts of that journal: 1. The editors and/or guest photographers were discussing readers' photos, giving their opinion of what is good, and what is bad (composition, exposure, cropping, ...), and what could be done to improve those photos. This includes "photo clinic" , and analyses of the specially organized readers'(or journalists'?) photo-shootings. 2. Relatively good comparative reviews of lenses, camera bodies, films, etc. Those were helpful to me for chosing the lenses, and via me - to my friends for chosing their equipment. In addition to these, they had overall much better quality pictures (less cliche, more original) then those in Pop.Photography, and some other occasional interesting articles. Igor
