04-13-2011, 04:55 PM
[quote name='joachim' timestamp='1302712357' post='7605']
Hi Markus,
Just to add, that your finding are absolutely in line with slrgear: [url="http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1360/cat/13"]http://www.slrgear.c...uct/1360/cat/13[/url] and they tested two copies. So don't worry about the fanboys and fangirls <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
To me it builds some confidence in the test results, if different lens testers come to compatible conclusions on a given lens. Typically I find that the case between photozone and slrgear. Most of the time, if either of you declares a lens to be a dog, the other site follows and similar for a good result. Gives confidence that the bottom line of your and their efforts has some significance beyond sample variation.
[/quote]
Yes, that's always a good approach. We've all a slightly different approach thus testing slightly different aspects.
Hi Markus,
Just to add, that your finding are absolutely in line with slrgear: [url="http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1360/cat/13"]http://www.slrgear.c...uct/1360/cat/13[/url] and they tested two copies. So don't worry about the fanboys and fangirls <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />To me it builds some confidence in the test results, if different lens testers come to compatible conclusions on a given lens. Typically I find that the case between photozone and slrgear. Most of the time, if either of you declares a lens to be a dog, the other site follows and similar for a good result. Gives confidence that the bottom line of your and their efforts has some significance beyond sample variation.
[/quote]
Yes, that's always a good approach. We've all a slightly different approach thus testing slightly different aspects.