Olympus 100-400mm/5.0-6.3 IS - my review

Petr Bambousek wrote:

And honestly I really don't understand why people tend to believe more "reviewers" who are not interested particularly to wildlife photography (and very often even to Oly gear) and just recap technical facts with several usually poor pictures. They are not even willing properly set the camera just make sure nothing is good enough for their needs.

Hear, hear!!!

Messier Object wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Messier Object wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

Adrian Harris wrote:

NCV wrote:

As expected some great pictures have been produced by the OP with this lens.

But I would say that the post should be titled "Presentation" rather than "Review", seeing that the OP is connected to Olympus by being a "Visionary."

This post is a social media marketing exploit and not in any way an impartial "review".

Please lets have some honest transparency and have an accurate title.

On balance I felt it was far superior to what DPreview managed to do!

Absolutely! I would much prefer to have a “presentation “ by someone who is both knowledgeable and accomplished, than a review by someone who is neither.

Are you suggesting that the DP reviewers are not knowledgeable or accomplished?

Are you suggesting that they are accomplished Micro FourThirds experts ?

Peter

What's a 'Micro Four Thirds expert'? I would hazard a guess

hazard a guess ? So you don’t know then

I really don't know. Why would you be an 'expert' in one particular camera format? Presumably you'd need to employ specific 'experts' for each format. You'd have a 1/2.3" expert, an 1/1.8" expert, a 1" expert, a Canon APS-C expert, a general APS-C expert, an FF expert, a small MF expert and a large MF expert. That's a lot of experts.

that they have had experience of more micro Four Thirds cameras

experience handling the latest model for a day so they can post a review, or are you saying that they are working pros who earn a living from them ? Or are they awarded wildlife photographers who use m43 ?

I suppose it depends on what you think a review is for. If you want one to act as a cheer leader for the faithful, then you're probably right. If you're a buyer, trying to select a product in a competitive landscape, you'd probably have prefer to have the review done by an across-the-field expert, who has experience of a wider range of products and can evaluate a product against the competition, wouldn't you?

than most of us, have experience of other cameras too, so that they can contextualise their reviews.

I’ll hazard my own guess and say that they have indeed handled more m43 camera models than I could even name, but neither of those DPR guys have spent much time using the equipment for any purpose other than to do a review.

Reviews is what they do. The clue is in the name of the site. And for myself, I'd prefer to have a review from such a person than from someone who is in a beneficial relationship with one particular manufacturer, which really can't to anything but bias his judgement, however subconsciously.

Messier Object wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Messier Object wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Messier Object wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

Adrian Harris wrote:

NCV wrote:

As expected some great pictures have been produced by the OP with this lens.

But I would say that the post should be titled "Presentation" rather than "Review", seeing that the OP is connected to Olympus by being a "Visionary."

This post is a social media marketing exploit and not in any way an impartial "review".

Please lets have some honest transparency and have an accurate title.

On balance I felt it was far superior to what DPreview managed to do!

Absolutely! I would much prefer to have a “presentation “ by someone who is both knowledgeable and accomplished, than a review by someone who is neither.

Are you suggesting that the DP reviewers are not knowledgeable or accomplished?

Are you suggesting that they are accomplished Micro FourThirds experts ?

Peter

What's a 'Micro Four Thirds expert'? I would hazard a guess

hazard a guess ? So you don’t know then

I really don't know. Why would you be an 'expert' in one particular camera format?

How does one become expert in the operation of anything - inherent ability/aptitude plus practice, experience using it under a wide range of situations.

Presumably you'd need to employ specific 'experts' for each format.

You'd have a 1/2.3" expert, an 1/1.8" expert, a 1" expert, a Canon APS-C expert, a general APS-C expert, an FF expert, a small MF expert and a large MF expert. That's a lot of experts.

This discussion is concerning Micro FourThirds. If this site was called “Micro FourThirds World” then a m43 expert user would be a good choice as a reviewer.

that they have had experience of more micro Four Thirds cameras

experience handling the latest model for a day so they can post a review, or are you saying that they are working pros who earn a living from them ? Or are they awarded wildlife photographers who use m43 ?

I suppose it depends on what you think a review is for. If you want one to act as a cheer leader for the faithful, then you're probably right.

If I want to know how much better the AF or the IBIS or the handling is compared with the previous models, or if I want to know how well the lens works in CAF with PDAF compared with the CDAF of the other m43 model then I want to hear about it from somebody who actually uses the cameras, not gets one for a day to write a review.

But hey if you want to use terms like “cheer leader” and “the faithful” then I’ll tell you that it’s not helping with your argument at all.

If you're a buyer, trying to select a product in a competitive landscape, you'd probably have prefer to have the review done by an across-the-field expert, who has experience of a wider range of products and can evaluate a product against the competition, wouldn't you?

a review that’s a mile wide and an inch deep is not much good when you have already ‘bought into’ a format and have no interest in how the product compares with other formats or lens mounts

than most of us, have experience of other cameras too, so that they can contextualise their reviews.

I’ll hazard my own guess and say that they have indeed handled more m43 camera models than I could even name, but neither of those DPR guys have spent much time using the equipment for any purpose other than to do a review.

Reviews is what they do. The clue is in the name of the site.

I don’t need the clues thanks, I know what the ‘R’ stands for

And for myself, I'd prefer to have a review from such a person than from someone who is in a beneficial relationship with one particular manufacturer, which really can't to anything but bias his judgement, however subconsciously.

I am fine with visionary "reviews" and DP...reviews both they have the pro and cons.

The OP is an Olympus visionary so maybe not completely impartial in his judgment. But on the other side, he uses regularly m43 gear and is an excellent photographer, and as nature photographer use often long tele-lenses.

So I am happy to hear his opinion and I just keep these things in mind when I read his review (or call it as you prefer).

and are the DPR guys not biased (subconsciously) by the personal gear that they own, or by the particular camera that failed them one time, or by some support issue with a particular camera maker . . .

I think they are. They are human beings and therefore by nature not objective but have their preferences or aversions.

Furthermore, Amazon (the owner of DPreview) main goal is not really to inform us but to convince us to buy a new camera or lens as often as possible.

Said that DP guys are generalists trying and testing different equipment so their review can provide different useful information than the one of a visionary.

bobn2 wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

Adrian Harris wrote:

NCV wrote:

As expected some great pictures have been produced by the OP with this lens.

But I would say that the post should be titled "Presentation" rather than "Review", seeing that the OP is connected to Olympus by being a "Visionary."

This post is a social media marketing exploit and not in any way an impartial "review".

Please lets have some honest transparency and have an accurate title.

On balance I felt it was far superior to what DPreview managed to do!

Absolutely! I would much prefer to have a “presentation “ by someone who is both knowledgeable and accomplished, than a review by someone who is neither.

Are you suggesting that the DP reviewers are not knowledgeable or accomplished?

Where's the smiley face?

Messier Object wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Messier Object wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Messier Object wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

Adrian Harris wrote:

NCV wrote:

As expected some great pictures have been produced by the OP with this lens.

But I would say that the post should be titled "Presentation" rather than "Review", seeing that the OP is connected to Olympus by being a "Visionary."

This post is a social media marketing exploit and not in any way an impartial "review".

Please lets have some honest transparency and have an accurate title.

On balance I felt it was far superior to what DPreview managed to do!

Absolutely! I would much prefer to have a “presentation “ by someone who is both knowledgeable and accomplished, than a review by someone who is neither.

Are you suggesting that the DP reviewers are not knowledgeable or accomplished?

Are you suggesting that they are accomplished Micro FourThirds experts ?

Peter

What's a 'Micro Four Thirds expert'? I would hazard a guess

hazard a guess ? So you don’t know then

I really don't know. Why would you be an 'expert' in one particular camera format?

How does one become expert in the operation of anything - inherent ability/aptitude plus practice, experience using it under a wide range of situations.

I didn't ask 'how'? I asked 'why'? And as an addendum, which characteristics as a photographer would we expect an mFT 'expert' to have over other kinds of 'expert'.

Presumably you'd need to employ specific 'experts' for each format.

You'd have a 1/2.3" expert, an 1/1.8" expert, a 1" expert, a Canon APS-C expert, a general APS-C expert, an FF expert, a small MF expert and a large MF expert. That's a lot of experts.

This discussion is concerning Micro FourThirds. If this site was called “Micro FourThirds World” then a m43 expert user would be a good choice as a reviewer.

...and have a much smaller audience. The fact is that is isn't called "Micro Four Thirds World" and perhaps that is a factor

that they have had experience of more micro Four Thirds cameras

experience handling the latest model for a day so they can post a review, or are you saying that they are working pros who earn a living from them ? Or are they awarded wildlife photographers who use m43 ?

I suppose it depends on what you think a review is for. If you want one to act as a cheer leader for the faithful, then you're probably right.

If I want to know how much better the AF or the IBIS or the handling is compared with the previous models, or if I want to know how well the lens works in CAF with PDAF compared with the CDAF of the other m43 model then I want to hear about it from somebody who actually uses the cameras, not gets one for a day to write a review.

But hey if you want to use terms like “cheer leader” and “the faithful” then I’ll tell you that it’s not helping with your argument at all.

I think it helps considerably with my argument, since the defensiveness engendered by it is very clear for any neutral to see. So what you're saying in the end is that you want reviews that only appeal to existing users ('the faithful') and the sole reason for having such a review is to convince you to upgrade (or not?)

If you're a buyer, trying to select a product in a competitive landscape, you'd probably have prefer to have the review done by an across-the-field expert, who has experience of a wider range of products and can evaluate a product against the competition, wouldn't you?

a review that’s a mile wide and an inch deep is not much good when you have already ‘bought into’ a format and have no interest in how the product compares with other formats or lens mounts

And you're saying it again. Make it only for the faithful. And in any case, I think DPR takes considerable care over their reviews, so as not to make them 'an inch deep'. Their problem seems to be that they sometimes say the wrong things, so far as the faithful is concerned.

than most of us, have experience of other cameras too, so that they can contextualise their reviews.

I’ll hazard my own guess and say that they have indeed handled more m43 camera models than I could even name, but neither of those DPR guys have spent much time using the equipment for any purpose other than to do a review.

Reviews is what they do. The clue is in the name of the site.

I don’t need the clues thanks, I know what the ‘R’ stands for

Oh. OK. Sorry, I thought that you might be having a little trouble with this.

And for myself, I'd prefer to have a review from such a person than from someone who is in a beneficial relationship with one particular manufacturer, which really can't to anything but bias his judgement, however subconsciously.

and are the DPR guys not biased (subconsciously) by the personal gear that they own, or by the particular camera that failed them one time, or by some support issue with a particular camera maker . . .

Very likely. Everyone is biased. Part of the human condition. But I would suggest that the driver for that kind of bias is somewhat difference from a bias from a manufacturer that is giving you things of value in exchange for your promotional activity on their behalf.

When I want to learn about a new Olympus camera I’d rather read the personal, hands-on experiences from a long-time Olympus user who is an accomplished exponent who shoots the same type of subjects at the same focal lengths as me. His/her bias towards the product is a given and I think I’m mature enough to take it into account. That doesn’t make me a member of the ‘faithful’ mesmerised by the cheerleader.

Sort of does. Anyhow, I'm wondering why you're frequenting a general photography site and not 'Micro Four Thirds World', which we later learned should be 'Olympus World', or whatever it becomes after the brand-name use runs out.

BTW I also use Canon FF and APS-C.

Funny that last one, because the subject was 'mFT' and somehow you turned it to 'Olympus'. They are not synonymous you know. Still, you've proved your point, using other formats certainly excludes you from the inner ring of the faithful.

Jan Chelminski wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

Adrian Harris wrote:

NCV wrote:

As expected some great pictures have been produced by the OP with this lens.

But I would say that the post should be titled "Presentation" rather than "Review", seeing that the OP is connected to Olympus by being a "Visionary."

This post is a social media marketing exploit and not in any way an impartial "review".

Please lets have some honest transparency and have an accurate title.

On balance I felt it was far superior to what DPreview managed to do!

Absolutely! I would much prefer to have a “presentation “ by someone who is both knowledgeable and accomplished, than a review by someone who is neither.

Are you suggesting that the DP reviewers are not knowledgeable or accomplished?

Where's the smiley face?

It was a genuine question. Was he suggesting that the DP reviewers are not knowledgeable and accomplished?

gary0319 wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Jan Chelminski wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

Adrian Harris wrote:

NCV wrote:

As expected some great pictures have been produced by the OP with this lens.

But I would say that the post should be titled "Presentation" rather than "Review", seeing that the OP is connected to Olympus by being a "Visionary."

This post is a social media marketing exploit and not in any way an impartial "review".

Please lets have some honest transparency and have an accurate title.

On balance I felt it was far superior to what DPreview managed to do!

Absolutely! I would much prefer to have a “presentation “ by someone who is both knowledgeable and accomplished, than a review by someone who is neither.

Are you suggesting that the DP reviewers are not knowledgeable or accomplished?

Where's the smiley face?

It was a genuine question. Was he suggesting that the DP reviewers are not knowledgeable and accomplished?

Bob, in direct answer to your question to me, Yes I think that Chris, in this particular video, was neither as knowledgeable, and certainly not as accomplished as Petr, nor actually knowledgeable enough to do a creditable review of this lens.

Creditable or credible?

Or maybe it was just a rushed job, since I have seen better from him. I think many folks, having viewed both "reviews", would think similarly.

So, where in particular do you think Chris' review was lacking? Because I just watched it, expecting him to have trashed the lens, from the way you lot are going on about it. For the life of me I can't see why you all are so aerated about it. He was mostly pretty complementary about it, certainly didn't raise the 'is it really a Sigma and if so, why does it cost twice as much?' question. The only thing he said which wasn't entirely positive is that it's quite slow, sufficiently so that you can't stop down without getting into diffraction blur. Both those things are objective facts. Then he said he didn't like the bokeh much. Which is an opinion, I suppose. Mind you, I think Petr said all of those things too (maybe not the bokeh bit)

I see that Chris didn't get into the Olympus marketing talking points in the same way. Maybe that's the problem.

But obviously not everyone

Obviously.