Holger wrote:
A usual people can't be happy. Nice compact lenses with very good performance, which will be able to take great images. But the focus is on flaws - but onion ring bokeh, but cats eye, but NFD bokeh, but mid zone bokeh, but ....
What do people expect? Otus like performance for 700 Euros in a small and light weight design? No aberrations but super smooth bokeh, no cats eyes, no onion ring bokeh? How is that gonna happening?
Whenever my expectations are too high I look at Albert Dros' Sony 16-35/4 images, made with a lens many think inferior to modern primes. These new lenses easily allow for fantastic images. Everything is a compromise.
Yes, how dare we point out issues with expensive 'premium' items that companies want us to buy, how inconsiderate of us.
Honestly what a valueless thing to say that adds nothing to the conversation. I'm sure you're not a stupid person, but positions like these are just dumb. People have every right to critique or not buy a product that other people are trying to sell them. Honestly it's how these companies improve.
I saw nothing out of line with what Holger said. Nothing that warrants such a harsh dismissal of his post.
What I took from their quote was that people need to keep their expectations in check when salivating over these new compact lenses. You can’t expect these lenses to perform with optic perfection considering the price point versus other offerings. If you want premium, then you’ll have to pay premium.
That's fine, and to be fair I may have misinterpreted Holger's statement to be more like the fanboys I see on places like SAR, which is why it felt so out of place here. Nothing wrong with keeping expectations in check, I just don't think anybody should take issue with critiquing the flaws of a commercial product, or how people go about making those critiques. Frankly, that kind of attitude is anti-consumer and just silly. If that's not what he was saying then I apologize, it's just a stance I feel strongly about.
