>From: "Dario Bonazza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Yes and no. Even using a given third-party lens, you (or someone else) >could >argue that lens vary sample to sample, so the resulting quality assessment >is debatable at best. >Then, provided that DPReview is using comparable lenses (which they do), I >don't find useless to know what quality I can get once I enter a given >camera system (which to some extent means a camera and its genuine lens, >doesn't it?). >
Yes, I don't recall reading any reviews of film camera bodies that were universally tested using the same 3rd party lenses. How did we ever get by before the internet? :-) How many users of a K10D, Sony Alpha, Canon whatever, or Nikon D80 are going to acquire the same 3rd party lens used by the theoretical tests we're discussing? I agree, most users are buying into a camera system, not just the camera body. Therefore doing tests with a commonly used lens within each camera system provides legitimate, if not perfect results, for a large number of readers. >Furthermore, I think that many prospect users are not so interested in a >sensor test. They are interested in camera performance. For those wanting >to >shoot RAW exclusively - and provided that DPReview or someone else would >ony >test RAW performance - you could look at the Nikon D80 or Sony Alpha 100 >test for knowing what to expect from the K10D. > >Even worse: which converter of choice for testing RAW files? Which release? >Isn't that changing on an almost daily basis? How to get comparable >results? >Then, isn't it possible that a given converter or a given conversion (or a >given tester!) would be biased toward a camera, or sensor, or whatever? I'm >truly afraid that your suggested test procedure will result being far more >debatable than testing a camera JPEG performance, which at least can be >rather associated to a given camera. > >Dario All good and valid points. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
