10-25-2017, 01:42 PM
Quote:And I can fake the sample images of all other lenses with my EXIF editor.And your point is...... ?
no sample images in Canon 24mm STM review ?
|
10-25-2017, 01:42 PM
Quote:And I can fake the sample images of all other lenses with my EXIF editor.And your point is...... ?
10-25-2017, 02:45 PM
I tried to keep my mouth shut, and again I fail. :mellow:
To me the sample pictures delivered with the test are the genuine jobs of the two testers Klaus and Markus. To me, that makes the samples comparable (within the brands). They have a certain style and certain skills, the cameras are more or less the same since ages. If now members of the PZ / OL forum contribute their pictures, someone would need to do the same job like they do - check for samples which say something realistic and meaningful. The basic idea of toni-A is trying to help, my concern is a wider spread in terms of quality which at the end doesn't give a good enough reference. RAW files are only one part of that story, again, someone needs to export them to JPGs. Also, Klaus and Markust test their samples - I haven't checked a single copy for decenterring, so I'm out anyway. I still think, we have the possibility to contribute our test shots when a lens in question got it's verdict. And, given the quality of today's lenses, the only take away from samples to me is "acceptable bokeh?" For everything else, like AF-speed, flare resistance, reliable AF there's so much different sources of influence - in general I only rely on my own test shots.
10-25-2017, 02:52 PM
Quote:And your point is...... ?That supplying "sample images" by readers is a silly idea.
10-25-2017, 03:18 PM
Quote:That supplying "sample images" by readers is a silly idea.Nevertheless, it's not unprecedented here. Besides, would you not trust yourself to do this?
10-25-2017, 03:27 PM
You mean "silly ideas"? True, we can come up with each desired quantity of them
I can't speak for BC, but I would not trust myself. In my experience it is very likely to miss some aspects when I do testings - some focus test rows I did twice. That's were skills and routine come in.
10-25-2017, 03:33 PM
Quote:Nevertheless, it's not unprecedented here. Besides, would you not trust yourself to do this?When Klaus tested a lens from a reader, and the reader supplied images from the actual tested lens, yes. I would not trust a number of fanboys to not increase contrast, or sharpen a bit, or get rid of CA.
10-25-2017, 03:49 PM
Maybe it's fair enough - after 14 years in the profession, I still fret over every article I write, expecting to fail somehow and get the thousands of readers misled.
Though I still have a lot of "good" pictures done with that 24-85, although all of them were shot in JPEG.
I was proposing because it did happen before, for Canon 70-300 full frame review, sample images were kindly provided by Jerry Kooyman. You can check the review and verify yourselves.
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/558...ff?start=1
10-25-2017, 07:42 PM
And the tested lens was Jerry Kooyman's, right?
10-25-2017, 07:48 PM
Review by Klaus Schroiff, published November 2010
Lens kindly provided for testing purposes by Christoph Siegwart! |
Users browsing this thread: |
1 Guest(s) |