Nocticron vs other portrait lenses (posts moved from Noct image thread)

Tadgh78

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Feb 25, 2013
Messages
74
Location
Ireland
It's not an exhaustive review though. One of the FF systems main advantages over M43 is performance under low light conditions. Yet for some strange reason the reviewer overlooked to create a controlled side by side comparison between the two lenses under low light, opting instead to neutralise any discrepancy by using flash.

If you were comparing a FF system to a M43 system wouldn't you be at least a tiny bit curious to see how they stacked up against each other under low light?

It's almost as if he's afraid to insult any of the companies that send him his review samples...
 
Last edited:

saladin

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
1,800
Location
Melbourne
Real Name
jason
yeah, but he's comparing lenses for sharpness, colours and bokeh, not sensor ability.
 

Tadgh78

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Feb 25, 2013
Messages
74
Location
Ireland
yeah, but he's comparing lenses for sharpness, colours and bokeh, not sensor ability.
That's not the point. Since these lenses are designed for two different systems, not comparing ISO performance on the respective systems constitutes a glaring oversight. It renders the review worthless for anybody trying to decide which lens and therefor which system to buy into. Worse yet it gives the impression to less knowledgeable readers that low light performance will be equivalent whichever of these lenses you use.

So what's the point of the review? It's primarily internet marketing. This guy makes his money out of click-through sales to websites like B&H and Adorama. Additionally, Panasonic and others send him review copies of lenses and he doesn't want to offend them in case they send their review copies somewhere else. Tyson Robichaud is a younger version of Ken Rockwell.
 
Last edited:

greenjp

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
May 15, 2014
Messages
93
Location
Maryland
Tyson steal your woman or pee in your Cheerios, Tadgh?

FWIW in paragraph 4 (ie right at the very beginning of a long review) he states "So, we have one glaring difference right off the bat in that we have two systems utilizing different sensor sizes, and requiring differing focal lengths to capture the same relative angle of view. I’ve gone on about this in the past, and have another article mostly written looking more deeply at these differences which I will be posting in the near future, so I’ll not get too into that here." I see that you posted a similar comment to the article, to which he clearly and politely responded that he would be doing just that so I think your remarks here are off base.

The review is only worthless if you can't read and/or are unknowledgeable about cameras. He's quite up front about what he's talking about, does so in clear language, and provides ample well-labeled sample pictures (including high res options) for the reader to look at. If you are unfamiliar enough with cameras and lenses that you can't look at the guitar photo side by sides and understand what he's talking about, you have no business complaining about his free reviews or spending $1,000 on these sorts of lenses.

jeff
 

Tadgh78

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Feb 25, 2013
Messages
74
Location
Ireland
I see that you posted a similar comment to the article, to which he clearly and politely responded that he would be doing just that so I think your remarks here are off base.
But he hasn't actually posted such a review yet has he? If he ever does get round to doing that, which I doubt, I might consider toning down some of my statements. However, I still think it is remiss of any reviewer to post a review which glosses over so significant an aspect of a camera system as light gathering ability. It is as I say, confusing to less knowledgeable buyers.

The review is only worthless if you can't read and/or are unknowledgeable about cameras. He's quite up front about what he's talking about, does so in clear language, and provides ample well-labeled sample pictures (including high res options) for the reader to look at. If you are unfamiliar enough with cameras and lenses that you can't look at the guitar photo side by sides and understand what he's talking about, you have no business complaining about his free reviews or spending $1,000 on these sorts of lenses.

jeff
That's utter nonsense, Jeff. The whole point of a hardware review is to contrast and compare the attributes of the systems being reviewed. As camera enthusiasts we may know that Full Frame systems will always beat micro four thirds when it comes to low light performance, but we may not know by exactly how much the FF system will beat the m43 system. That is information that many people reading that review would like to have had.

It's just a pity that Tyson, couldn't be bother to do a proper job.

As for the view being "free", well I'm sure he gets paid one way of another. But frankly I don't care whether he's a pauper or a millionaire, if he is putting out incomplete and misleading information, people need to be warned about it, before they waste their money.
 

greenjp

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
May 15, 2014
Messages
93
Location
Maryland
The review in question was posted on 10/28, so 2 weeks ago. The last gear review he posted was in March, and even that was just a shutter-shock test of the GX8. He obviously isn't cranking out gear reviews on the regular at this time. That, together with the fact that he acknowledged your issue directly up front and apparently intends to post another review directly addressing it, reinforces my thought that your remarks are way off base. To accuse him of providing incomplete or misleading information when he explicitly tells you exactly what he's doing and provides many well annotated sample photos is just silly.

What you're complaining about here is that his stated objectives for the review are not your objectives. Your post reads like "I want this guy to review what I want, how I want, and when I want!" You sound like you've got some axe to grind.

I'm sure his follow up, whenever he gets around to it, will be similarly well done. This guy is not a review machine (you can go to Steve Huff, Cameralabs, Mirrorlessons, et al if that's what you want - better yet, start your own review site) but IMO his reviews and other posts are well done. FWIW he's posted a number of multi-part reviews over the years so his approach to this one is no different.

My point about his reviews being free was that you pay exactly zero dollars/pounds/euros to read them. They cost you nothing so regardless of where his income is derived, or how large it is, the reviews are in fact free.

jeff
 

Tyson

New to Mu-43
Joined
Jul 15, 2017
Messages
0
First, thank you Speedliner. Glad you enjoyed it.

Jeff, also appreciate you defending my honor. Fist bump.

Okay Tadgh let's take a deep breath here...
But he hasn't actually posted such a review yet has he? If he ever does get round to doing that, which I doubt, I might consider toning down some of my statements. However, I still think it is remiss of any reviewer to post a review which glosses over so significant an aspect of a camera system as light gathering ability. It is as I say, confusing to less knowledgeable buyers.



That's utter nonsense, Jeff. The whole point of a hardware review is to contrast and compare the attributes of the systems being reviewed. As camera enthusiasts we may know that Full Frame systems will always beat micro four thirds when it comes to low light performance, but we may not know by exactly how much the FF system will beat the m43 system. That is information that many people reading that review would like to have had.

It's just a pity that Tyson, couldn't be bother to do a proper job.

As for the view being "free", well I'm sure he gets paid one way of another. But frankly I don't care whether he's a pauper or a millionaire, if he is putting out incomplete and misleading information, people need to be warned about it, before they waste their money.
I understand the follow up article has not yet made its way onto the blog. Guess what, life happens. I won't go into details on my life any more than I share already on my blog, but you seem to have a horribly misunderstood vision for what I am and what I do. I BUY my gear, I do not get these lenses from Panasonic or Zeiss. Yes, I've reviewed two lenses that were loaned to me, and I explicitly listed where and when, in those cases. I make so little money from referenced sale links, it isn't even funny. I say this because this site is not my job, nor do I want it to be. I spend what very little free time I have (and lately it has been VERY little) doing these reviews because I like doing them, and I like interacting with other photographers. I'm not sponsored, nor do I give a shit about what Panasonic, Sony, Canon, Olympus, Zeiss, Leica or whomever I've reviewed gear from think about what I say, which I cannot say about some other sites. I've always been critical when I feel it worthy, and praise when I see it justified, because I have spent my own money and want to make sure I feel I'm getting a good deal. I started and have continued my site to be entirely user based, hoping to give non corporate insight to folks, like me, who might be looking for a more personal review approach. If that's not your bag of chips, no worries whatsoever.

I understand this thread is old, but I'm seeing it for the first time and created an account here just to let you know that if you don't like what I spend my time doing, entirely for free, go ahead and ignore me. I don't care. I'll continue to write for readers and photographers who want unbiased, thoughtful user reviews written with my endearing charm, poetic prose, and total humility You want to spend hours shooting high ISO shots between formats to prove your camera is better or worse, go for it man! I've been doing it for nearly a decade now, and will continue when I have the time to do so. If you'd like to fund me directly to do your bidding, by all means, swing by my site and I'll let you know where to send checks. If not though, maybe, just maybe, people like me who don't make much at all doing this, but still love to do so, might have had other things going on in their lives, and will get back at it when the smoke clears.

All my best,

Tyson
 

greenjp

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
May 15, 2014
Messages
93
Location
Maryland
No problem Tyson :) Your GX7 reviews were very helpful to me when I was deciding what to upgrade to from my G3. I am a moderately knowledgeable family picture taker and proficient cheapskate, so I like to be as informed as possible even when parting with a mere $300. Your reviews are unusually well done and honest.

jeff
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom