Gary from Seattle
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 8,770
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 11,570
No, but is disingenuous to title the thread why I didn't buy the OM-1 when you don't even need or understand what the OM-1 is designed for.
Last edited:
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Robin Wong criticises Olympus
- Thread starter Cafe Racer
- Start date
Based on this thread about to max out I would say Robin’s video was a success! As for OMDS after reading all the posts in this thread I would place my bet on oly assets be sold off again in parts. Basically being squeezed out from the top and bottom. I don’t see building very expensive cameras around a small sensor with the lowest pixel count and smallest pitch and long glass with FF weight sustainable.
DA
DA
Gary from Seattle
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 8,770
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 11,570
On which models with what intended market?
Yes, it was being designed, etc.
He didn't mention that, nor did he have the EM-5 III which was designed to be light weight - hence plastic! Duh!
Wow. These are quality control issues like other manufacturers have also. This is another example of you going off the deep end and blowing smoke.
Do you think that mattered to them at low ISO's any way. Several pointed out that at the high ISO end they gained two stops (Rouse for example).
About time.You promised to leave this forum and not to keep posting the same crap over and over.
You are blowing smoke. I do not believe there was any such "ambassador".
But you say he is a "portrait ambassador". You should be smart enough to know that the EM-1X was not designed as a "portrait" camera.
EM1X isn't just for wildlife even though that's the new change in direction.
Why? OMDS decided to focus on wildlife. What he's heavily using now? Sony.
For portraits....... ;-) Take a look at Mike Lane's works or lokatz' here. But what is your point anyway about this unknown "ambassador".
He was a pretty known ambassador to the point that he was the one in the main video presenting the EM1X.
but I haven't checked his very latest so who knows.
I like his personality and he sure has good knowledge.
Of portaits https://www.joeedelman.com/portfolio
Last edited:
Gary from Seattle
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 8,770
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 11,570
Well no, of course, but Wong's style of photography is not exactly cutting edge when it comes to technical demands on the gear. The greatest sophistication in equipment is in wildlife and action photography. That is obviously not his forte. (full quote, not cherry-picked)yeah, but I was not talking to you. I was talking about the now "fallen" Robin which apparently is not a good photographer anymore, but somehow was very good before and pretty much nobody said he wasn't. What changed?
gary0319
Forum Pro
He may well be, but I don’t recall him ever doing any reviews of his use of Olympus gear for weddings. Maybe I just missed them. But, even so, I’ve not seen any promos from OMDS that highlighted weddings or even portraiture as a focus for their cameras. The thrust of the OMDS advertising that I have seen is all focused on wildlife, adventure travel, and some action sports, none of which seem to be an endeavor of Robin Wong. I’m not meaning to deride Robin, I thoroughly enjoyed all of his equipment reviews over the past years.
Last edited:
joeletx
Senior Member
Agreed 100%
joeletx
Senior Member
It does not occur to me that you do.
"Conflict of interest" does not mean Robin can't tell bad things about a product, bugs or something that does not work. Any company would encourage product feedback as much as possible. Your saying "talking negative" makes no sense.
joeletx
Senior Member
He was in his prior life. I have seen some old albums of wedding photos shot from A-Series Sony camera. Most photos shot recently with Olympus cameras were working men face street portraits.
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum