[genotypewriter]

[quote name='wim' timestamp='1291669257' post='4796']

Even in Juza's winter landscape shot you can see the blurred details in the corners, even at this small magnification. Look at the crystals in the granite boulders - they are smeared, even if maybe not as bad as with the lens specimens I experienced <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.

[/quote]

I certainly don't think Juza got one of the best samples of the lens but he certainly didn't get one that deserves the sort of bashing that it gets from most reviews... especially when considering that this is the only lens giving this field of view and with zero distortion too.



If you look at the other link, only around the 21mm mark on the frame radius it looks a bit dodgy... I have a feeling that there could be some strong field curvature there because I see a diagonal line being sharp across the crop, instead of the total smear it should be. If you look at Juza's neighbourhood shot corner crops, you don't see this kind of smearing, possibly because there's enough DOF at that distance.





[quote name='wim' timestamp='1291669257' post='4796']

BTW, the original 24L was declared the #1 lens in its class at 16-9.net originally <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.

[/quote]

Yes, I remember them stating that their sample was quite different from what other online review sites got a hold of.





What I can't say is how many samples one needs to go through before they get a good one <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



GTW