It wouldn't be all that expensive. How many lens mounts are there in Digital currently?
Pentax, Canon, Minolta, Nikon, 4/3, and now Leica. They could probably dispense with Leica. In fact get an Adaptal II Macro, (focal length is even relatively unimportant), for the sensor resolution tests. Every thing else could be tested with the lens that came with the test camera, but the sensor resolution test would be much more honest using the same lens for each test, removing a major variation. Tom C wrote: >> 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. > > > > -- All dogs have four legs; my cat has four legs. Therefore, my cat is a dog. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
