What do you think of OpticalLimits lens reviews and their new format?

[Thsz]

I have always thought highly of OpticalLimits (formerly photozone.de) lens reviews, and still do. However I'm not sure I like their new format look though. https://opticallimits.com/

What is you opinion?

I much prefer the old-style photozone layout, where it was possible to access all of a manufacturer's lens types on one page.

The new view is bloated with an unappetising sameness of black & red thumbnail-sized images with sickly white lettering stencilled in a bad format across it. It looks cheap, unprofessional, & yucky. Like a cheap local rag, shoved through the letter box, trying to sell you something you don't really want.

The 'legacy' review pages are easy on the eye, with lots of info all in a single glance.

I agree with you about the new format. It now looks more like a cheap website selling photo gear to me. Hopefully their lens reviews continue to be worthy of trust.

I dont care too much about the look. The content and information is important to me. The new look is a modern refreshment. For me opticallimits is a honest and valuable source for lens reviews. I only wish they would review L-mount lenses.

 

[jonikon]

The old format was easy to use, mature layout, more scientific in appearance and gave an impression of an analytical and testing site.

The new format is childish, gives an impression of a site which is selling some products like walmart or future shop and does not give a scientific impression in anyway.

Optical limits is one of the best testing sites when it comes to reviews, along with Lenstip.

Hopefully someone, working at optical limits, will read this thread and think about improving the layout and format.

I also hope they improve the look. The red lettering looks especially bad on my screen. Blue would be much better.

 

[Rene Gr]

Sorry, but for me this is a clean modern layout. Approaching 70, I appreciate less noise on the page.

I would fear more that they stop doing their excellent reviews.

 

[Chris R-UK]

I have had another look at the site and I see that my problem of white text against a white background disappears in portrait orientation. It is still difficult to find a particular lens. Also, in the M4/3 section, a lot of early lens reviews are missing - I couldn't find one for the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro, a lens that is still widely used.

 

[Klaus dk]

I have had another look at the site and I see that my problem of white text against a white background disappears in portrait orientation. It is still difficult to find a particular lens. Also, in the M4/3 section, a lot of early lens reviews are missing - I couldn't find one for the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro, a lens that is still widely used.

The "PRO" designation is missing, but the review is there.

 

[Chris R-UK]

I have had another look at the site and I see that my problem of white text against a white background disappears in portrait orientation. It is still difficult to find a particular lens. Also, in the M4/3 section, a lot of early lens reviews are missing - I couldn't find one for the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro, a lens that is still widely used.

The "PRO" designation is missing, but the review is there.

Thanks Klaus. I missed it first time around - I knew that was released in 2013 and was looking for the review in that year. That demonstrates the problem with the layout and having the reviews pages ordered by review date. I am sure that they reviewed other M4/3 lenses in earlier years, so perhaps they haven't got round to transferring them over yet.