The comparison of first lines at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_translations_of_Homer does a good job of giving some sense of the differences in style between various translations.
Each to their own, of course, but I wanted to provide a counterpoint to anyone out there deciding on a translation to read.
An example of the opposite, as hackneyed as it is appropriate, is Moby Dick. Melville was a popular author who created something that was very out of sync with the era (to which previously he had suited his style) and as it turns out very interesting - but only once the zeitgeist had advanced.
Today translators are expected to be reasonable faithful to the source material. Adding rhymes to verses which is not originally rhymed, like Pope does, represent an older tradition where the translator had more free reign. Modern readers would probably expect a more faithful translation.
Yeah Shakespeare is a great example.
The King James Bible might be the ur-example, as I’ve heard it said that it’s so influential it basically shaped the English language.
As another poster said, the phrase “product of its time” in this case is talking about if the language holds up over time or ends up sounding dated and thus loses its luster.