Abu Ahmad al-Hakim: He is not considered strong (reliable) by them
Abu Ahmad ibn 'Adi al-Jurjani: A man known for Hadith, narrates from trustworthy people, and I hope there's no problem with him. He wrote many Hadiths, people narrated from him, and I didn't see anything objectionable in his Hadith. The statement of those who considered him trustworthy is closer to the truth than those who weakened him.
Abu Hatim al-Razi: They speak about him, he narrates from trustworthy people, and he's a weak Sheikh
Abu Dawud al-Sijistani: Weak, Ahmad used to write from him and he had a good opinion about him, but I don't narrate from him.
Abu Zur'a al-Razi: Weak
Abu Ya'la al-Khalili: There's leniency in him
Ahmad ibn Hanbal: He was known, a man of Sunnah
Ahmad ibn Shu'ayb al-Nasa'i: He is not trustworthy
Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani: Weak, many mistakes, talks a lot
al-Fadl ibn Sahl: He spoke ill of him
Ali ibn al-Madini: He used to narrate Hadiths and was a man of Sunnah, and I defended him, but he...? And he weakened him. And once, there was no one in Baghdad more knowledgeable than him in Sunnah, and how good was Abu 'Abd Allah's (meaning Ahmad ibn Hanbal) opinion of him.
Amr ibn 'Ali al-Fallas: Weak in Hadith
Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Bukhari: His Hadith is rejected, I abandoned his narration
Yahya ibn Ma'in: He is not trustworthy, and once: One of the deceivers. And in the narration of Ibn Mahriz, he said: He lies, may Allah disgrace him.