Cyril wrote:
> But on another hand do you think this magazine ranked the FA* 85/1.4 5 stars
> (1993) to push customers to buy it, hands behind the eyes ? Or do you think
> they ranked a 3 star only at the A* 85/1.4 (this test is dated 10 years !)
> to lead customers to buy CANON of NIKON instead of PENTAX ? I do not think
> so...
Not at all. I don't think they have a hidden agenda apart from marketing their
magazine. I just don't think lens test based on MTF is good consumer information
regardless of the motives behind publishing them.
However, To adress the real issue here and make it concise:
I've seen the 43 Limited rated from reference quality to so-so, The A* 135/1.8 from
state of the art to run-of-the-mill, the A* 85/1.4 likewise, The FA* 80-200/2.8 from
an utter dog hardly better than the worst 28-200 zooms to the best of its type, etc
All this from "reputable" lens tests. Now what vaue is this as consumer information?
Now how do you pick what lens tests to believe in except from personal or other users
experience? Of course some may claim CDI tests are always right and those who
disagree, being other test or personal experience is wrong. However, I see no rational
explanation for such statements.
The only way I personally can say whetehr I should put faith in a perticular lens test
is if I (or people I trust) have personal experience with that lens. But if I already
know how good or bad a lens is, what value then have a lens test for me? Since test of
one and the same lens varies so widely you cannot assume than a lens test necessarily
turn into reliable information about its performance on a camera.
True, some lenses seems to performs similarly in various tests but others as described
above varies wildly. What does this say about the reliability of lens tests?
I for one bought the FA* 85/1.4 partly based on the CDI five star test and post on
PDML by someone who had seen a large print shot by this lens widen open. I was
bitterly disapointed. Theres no doubt to me whatsoever that the FA* lenses are
designed with the end use in mind while the A* lenses are far less compromised. Eg. I
suspect that the FA* 85/1.4 lens is designed as portrait lens, something that makes it
score well on those lens test that only test lenses at close distances, whereas er.
the FA* 400/5.6 is optimized for best possible wide-open performanze at the expense of
optimum achieveable performance stopped down. This makes this lens never score that
well in lens tests in spite of the fact that this lens is possible among the best for
its most common usage.
> I'm on the list for 2 month now, and from my archives I can find that you're
> on Clover's back for a long time... Is'nt it time for reconciliation ?
Not at all. Many are "on his back" and thats to be expected. Clover posted that lens A
was better than lens B and C because CDI said so. All here who have experiences with
these lenses disagree, but Clover still insist that CDI is right and thereby saying
our experience isn't valid.
Pål
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
