From: "Alan Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 14:00:20 -0800
When someone said the opposite, everyone started to defend how good Pentax lenses are, or even better than Canon or Nikon. I know SMC is excellent on flare control. But I just wonder, where is the hard evidence to prove SMC lenses are superior in general (at least not in test results I have read so far)?
Where is the hard evidence that SMC lenses are *not* superior?
There are those on this list who insist that Nikon and Canon has the edge on lens performance. (very strange, because - what are they doing here then?) I've read lens tests for the last 14 years (Aktuell Fotografi, FOTO, Practical Photography, Popular Photography, Buying Camera (they merged with Practical Photography for some years ago)), and the general conclusion I can get from them is that Pentax usually is at the very top (often with Leica and Zeiss) when it comes to the prime lenses and the FA* zooms. The consumer zooms are more average, but Pentax are getting better and better here.
Some magazines actually uses the lenses, not only measures them. Sadly, this is still very unusual. Any way, Pentax is the leader of the pack when it comes to flare control (according to those field tests). Colour rendition and contrast is not easy to say something about, since this comes down to personal preferencies. Those who prefer Nikon, does it because of the lenses special optical characteristics, those who prefer Pentax does it because of the lenses special optical characteristics. And so on. Some says that Nikon are "neutral" and Pentax "warm", some says that Nikon are "cold" and Pentax "neutral". What can be said that Nikon lenses has, in general, a more narrow contrast range than Pentax lenses. Some likes this, some does not. Just like some likes Velvia, some likes Agfa.
Best wishes, Roland
_________________________________________________________________ L�ttare att hitta dr�mresan med MSN Resor http://www.msn.se/resor/
