It's pretty hard to say. Most of his conclusions beg the question: "Recommended (or not recommended) for what?" For example, I would opine that the best lens for use as a hammer or to throw at an attacking dog is unquestionably the 14-140, mediocre aperture specs notwithstanding. For saving money, it is not a good choice however.Was Thom on target?
One mans opinion Amin
Is he a m43 aficionado don't think so.
Hardly worth providing counter opinions on his mini-review
(were you hoping for some forum opinion's) ???
Problem with reviewers is they simply don't understand optical design.
Yeah, I think it's interesting that the one he says "optically it's excellent" gets a "not recommended" and for autofocus issues which are probably more to do with the body than the lens.
John, Thom's a Nikon guy, but he has been very positive on Micro 4/3 and is himself a Micro 4/3 (in addition to Nikon) user. I've read a lot of his writings over time and have come to respect his opinion. I don't agree with all of his assessments, but I found them interesting.
With all due respect, I think applying a religious test is unwise. These things are simply tools. Hammers, screwdrivers, electron microscopes, cameras ... All tools. The sensible question is "What is the best tool for my job today?"... he's not so committed ...