[Studor13]

Ian, you are 100% correct (but only 93.67 in the corners).



Isn’t it ironic, don’t you think, that on a photography forum people are actually not interested in photographs?

“Studor, whatever you say is not going to carry any weight”.



This is why I showed three very decent images.



No one came back with “Sorry Studor, but I have several dozen images which show just how bad this lens is”. Forget a dozen; there was not even one example of a bad image made by this lens.



And it is I who has no credibility?



But of course everyone here wants to see how sharp this lens is because that’s all that matters.



So, here is one shot - into the sun.

http://www.studor13.si/music/photos/PZ/_09B1092.jpg



Can you see details like cars, windows, smoke coming out of chimneys and so on? The sharpness on the church - what I would consider as a border/corner - is consistent with sharpness in other areas to my eyes, at least.



And how about the light? Oh, forget the light. No one here is interested that sort of stuff, right?



Images like this (at 18mm) are made with real details, real colors and at real distances. Is a lens tested at 60x FL a true gauge of how the lens will perform at every real distance? At 18mm the all-important test charts are 1m (60xFL), distance to camera. The church in the frame is more than 1km away!



But of course no one cares any of this. They only want to see results from charts at 60xFL, right?



Let’s now look at what photography is all about to me with my final (I promise) examples.



I would like to ask, “If you were here in Slovenia on your own and wanted to buy one of these as a 0.50 cent postcard for a loved one back home which would you buy?”.



http://www.studor13.si/music/photos/PZ/DSC_2800.JPG

http://www.studor13.si/music/photos/PZ/DSC_2803.JPG



One is shot with the 18-35 and the other with the 18-70. They are taken more or less at the same time.

I bet some of you would say “Humm,.. I’m going to have to first send it to PZ and have them do a resolution test to see which has the best performance in the corners” or something to that effect.



I would choose the first one (18-35) because there is just something about the colors with the second one that bothers me. Something to do with the yellows, I think (look at the road). It just has a different feel to it. Incidentally, the first is also a bit sharper at infinity.



Photography to me is more about emotions and connections rather than squiggly little meaningless lines in a test chart. It was because of this funny feeling with the 18-70 that I stopped using it. The same goes for the 18-55 II and VR.



This is not to say that resolution numbers are not important. They are. Even I want a sharp lens. But sometimes I use the 35mm f2 AI-s although it is quite soft in the corners. This is actually what I want, but it has something magic about it in the center.



No doubt some folks are just dying for Markus to make his declaration that resolution on the extreme-corners is that of a one-star lens, so I better not disappoint you all and go and send the lens.



I can already see people queuing with fists clenched ready to shout “Yes, yes, yes”.



Talk the Talk, Walk the Walk.