03-21-2011, 10:17 PM
[quote name='arv' timestamp='1300661154' post='6987']
Looking at Canon 8Mp and 15Mp results it is obvious that there is no constant coefficient to compare exact numbers. Thus Klaus should retest all lenses for exact numbers. In latter case IMHO question is more academic, as if it is exellent on K5 it should (could
) be even better for K10, but that won't be valid for other lenses.
A.
[/quote]
I will, of course, test some of the previously covered lenses but the priority is on newer lenses.
The results for the old tests are a guidance naturally. Bad lenses will remain but and good ones will remain good.
That's a lesson learned with the EOS 50D vs 350D results - no matter whether the numbers and the spread are different.
Looking at Canon 8Mp and 15Mp results it is obvious that there is no constant coefficient to compare exact numbers. Thus Klaus should retest all lenses for exact numbers. In latter case IMHO question is more academic, as if it is exellent on K5 it should (could
) be even better for K10, but that won't be valid for other lenses. A.
[/quote]
I will, of course, test some of the previously covered lenses but the priority is on newer lenses.
The results for the old tests are a guidance naturally. Bad lenses will remain but and good ones will remain good.
That's a lesson learned with the EOS 50D vs 350D results - no matter whether the numbers and the spread are different.