on 10.09.03 17:32, Boris Liberman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Pentax SMC-FA 3,5-5.6/28-90mm, (130 Euros) >> 28/50/90mm: 68/75/65 pts, averag 69 pts. >> >> Pentax SMC-FA 3,2-4,5/28-105mm, (300 Euros) >> 28/70/105mm: 66/66/65 pts, average 66 pts. > > Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems like the first of the two is a > kit zoom lens, which can be bought in States for less than $100. The > second one is at least one class higher and can be bought in States > for $200 (Adorama). So how come the prices? How come the ratings? > > Or I am missing something very basic here... Taht's just another proof how stupid some tests could be... I just remember, that in CF tests, older "kit" lens - FA 28-80/3.5-5.6 was better than not only FA 28-70/4 AL, but even it proved to be better than FA* 28-70/2.8... I haven't seen more stupid results than in this magazine. If you want to see antoher test of these two particulat lenses (28-105 and 28-90) go to www.popphoto.com - they just make prints and then visual inspection - results are at tables at different enlargements and apertures (hint: 28-105 is better).
-- Best Regards Sylwek
