Robin Wong G9 Review - Thoughts?

shinndigg wrote:

Holistic Photog wrote:

bluevellet wrote:

slartz wrote:

• "There is no easy way of saying this, but I dislike the color profile of the G9. The default JPEG color and the white balance engine don’t work for me. I find the reds unnatural with strong hints of magenta and the green channel is off as well. Skin tones don’t look close to real life and the overall balance is not pleasing. Perhaps the problem is not with the camera, but my own preference." - This is also very weird as ALL other reviews claims this camera has finally great JPGs. Any ideas?

Robin Wong is a long time Olympus user, he's used to those Olympus colors. I can relate. The WB and some of the colors on my GM1 drive me nuts. Raw processing can help, but not always.

With that said, the photos in the review look great, although a bit more unsaturated than usual for Robin Wong.

They actually look a lot better to me than anything he's ever done before. When I go back and look at the skin tones he's had previously and compare them to these skin tones, there's no comparison. I just don't like the skin tones he's gotten from processing in Olympus Viewer. They look artificial to me.

These are the most realistic and punchy shots he's done. Just IMO.

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I honestly don't get how people see it the other way around. What's very clear though is that it's pretty easy to tell what was done by Oly and what was done by Panny, especially when different RAW processors are use. The difference might disappear if the same RAW developer is use. Not sure though.

It's simply a matter of taste. I personally prefer the Olympus color tones. To say "I don't get how people see it the other way around" demonstrates clear bias on your part.

Not bias at all.  We all have moments when we fail to understand why other people don't share our tastes.

Main point being, it's YOUR opinion...

Sure it is,. Based on his commebts

Holistic Photog wrote:

shinndigg wrote:

Main point being, it's YOUR opinion...

The truth is, in his review of the Canon EOS M6, which was processed with the same program as the G9, Capture One Pro, the pics don't look as good as the G9 either. I'm not sure why that is. Olympus is in good company here.

Some comparisons of various Olympus cameras with various lenses to the G9. They're not exact comparisons but similar. I have a clear favorite in terms of color for all of them, and I'm sure you know what that is. The first in all of these is the G9.

I don't take it personally in any way...I'm just pointing out the obvious.

arbux wrote:

erichK wrote:

Boss of Sony wrote:

I find his reviews quite subjective, with little evidence provided.

Using a camera is also quite subjective. Many years ago Popular Photography used to do extensive "lab tests" of every camera. I found them nearly worthless.

Subjective is worthless, objective is worthless, all is worthless, we are doomed!!!

The best possible advice for anyone who is actually seeking to use a camera to take pictures is to try it, before buying it. Over 4+ decades of photography I have almost invariably found myself regretting buying a camera or lens based on "features" or "performance". Such "subjective" user commentaries have been much better in narrowing down the selection of what might works for me. Then comes the only real test: actually handlilng it repeatedly.

How do you handle repeateadly camera that you don't own?

By going to the local camera shop (there's only Don's left - there use to be three) with a SD card and a few lenses in the bag or vest I use regularly, and *carefully* handling their demonstrator(s).  I often give them a call and arrange a time and make sure that they have the model I am interested in first.  Usually, they tell me to feel free to take it out for a walk or even borrow it for a day.  I'm always very careful and they know that; I will not buy something that I have not tried fairly extensively.  They know that, too.

BTW they, and many -perhaps most- retailers have a 14 day, no-questions-asked money-back guarantee.  I've never had to do that, though I sometimes wish that I'd used it with my G85.

I never buy based on "reviews" from commercial sites like this one, though I do take the sort of "user reports" Robin just did much more seriously.  Over forty+ years of photography, I've learned that their basic purpose is to sell us yet more "new".

Donald B wrote:

Trevor Carpenter wrote:

slartz wrote:

shinndigg wrote:

... His images show an incredible amount of detail... of course he shot RAW and used Capture One... but...

I agree. Some of his Macro shots really show the potential of m43 details

Totally agree, that Horse Fly type is brilliant. It makes me want to know how much is down to the camera, how much to his flash technique and how much to his basic skills.

your not serious shot with the 14 150 oly

I gave a link to some of these shots in a discussion on another format where someone claimed m43 is wrong for landscape for lack of detail...

Unfortunately this one is far away from being perfect. Seems to be shot as JPG and then additionally sharpened (too much halos). If he went JPG route it will do much better using incamera IRes - which does not create those halos - however this is a feature which is frequently unknown to reviewers - and when yes - they do not have an idea what it is good for.