[Studor13]

Before we lose our tempers, let's just look at the issue here.



According to PZ, the resolution figures on the 18-35mm at 35mm at f4.5:

D200 - 1826 (center) 992 (border)

D700 - 2145 (center) 1175 (border)

Even worse on FX.



Whilst the 18-55 II also at 35mm and at 4.5:

D200 - 2054(center) 1926 (border)



The borders on the 18-55 (II or VR) are reported to be almost double that of the 18-35.



This is the issue. Not whether or not you think Bjorn Rorlett and Ken Rockwell don't know what they are talking about.



Now look at the links I provided. None of the three other lenses show anything like double the resolution of the 18-35 at 35mm in the corners. In fact they look worse! Especially the 35mm f2 AI-s at f4.



This means that the 18-35 sample that I have and the sample that PZ tested on are no way similar.



So, why is this a big deal?



It's because PZ has made a conclusion of a lens based on one and only one lens. No one else that I am aware of have such an opinion on the 18-35.



And why am I stuck on just this lens?



It's because if there is this discrepancy with this lens, then how many others are there with doubtful conclusions?



It's not good enough to say "Well, no one else wants to send us their copy for testing". If everyone else is saying "Hey, we think there is a problem with your sample", PZ should get it checked out or somehow get another sample before sticking on a one star rating.



In one of the verdicts of this lens, PZ writes "The lens delivers very good to excellent sharpness in the image center, but that's about all the good news we can report".



They should add "Our conclusions are based on only one sample, but every other person on the planet claims to have a much better copy".