Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
next PZ lens test report: Pentax SMC DA 35mm f/2.4 AL
#21
[quote name='dave9t5' timestamp='1300587505' post='6955']

The "Rating Scale" for K-5 is missing from the DAL 35/2.4 test, which is causing some confusion.



For example, this is the one for K-20:

[Image: rating_k10d.gif]



But the vertical axis of the new test is still in the 5 divisions that represent [ex/very good/good/fair/poor].

[/quote]

Do you mean the K10D, not the K-20 (which camera is this meant to be? The K20D?)?
#22
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1300649257' post='6980']

Not again please. This has been discussed quite a bit.



Please google:

Imatest Nyquist binning

[/quote]



As you wish Klaus. Though, it looks like even quite experienced members of this forum are not so clear how to interpret/compare results of the lens resolution tests.



Regards,

Peter
#23
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 (couldSmile) be even better for K10, but that won't be valid for other lenses.



A.
#24
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1300149277' post='6779']

Looks like a good performer, it seems to improve in CA performance over the Pentax 35mm f2 which was a very good lens for the type. From your graphs, it seems like the old lens was as sharp in the center, but a bit sharper still on the borders.



What struck me is that the APS-C only DA f2.4 has the same size as the full frame 35mm f2!



Will the 35mm f1.8 DT from Sony be tested soon by you? It is the missing 35mm on APS-C in photozone's reviews now.

[/quote]



Yes, it looks kinda big for an APS-C F/2.4 lens.

The Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 35mm f/2.4 is FF but about the same size.
#25
[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 (couldSmile) 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.
#26
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1300745824' post='7000']

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.

[/quote]

Klaus what do you think about the K-5 as a camera?
#27
[quote name='Christos' timestamp='1300817270' post='7025']

Klaus what do you think about the K-5 as a camera?

[/quote]



Excellent with two exceptions:

- the AA filter is too strong

- LiveView has quite some lag
#28
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1300824187' post='7027']

Excellent with two exceptions:

- the AA filter is too strong

- LiveView has quite some lag

[/quote]

Thanks I ordered one and I have heard great things about it,, I will be keeping my 5D II though but someone that has both 5D II and K-5 told me the tests that he did the K-5 was pretty much on par with the 5D II and that seems kind of strange to me.
#29
What do you find strange about that?
#30
[quote name='Christos' timestamp='1300825058' post='7028']

Thanks I ordered one and I have heard great things about it,, I will be keeping my 5D II though but someone that has both 5D II and K-5 told me the tests that he did the K-5 was pretty much on par with the 5D II and that seems kind of strange to me.

[/quote]

On par in what respect? Not field of view, not DOF range... Which is what makes full frame stand out over APS-C.
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
2 Guest(s)