masp
03-19-2010, 11:51 PM
I've been reading a lot of Photozone's lens tests lately, and I'm wondering how their numbers add up in terms of practical performance. Is sharpness the most important lens characteristic? How would you organize lens characteristics from most to least important?
They also test for distortion, vignetting, chromatic aberrations, bokeh, and bokeh fringing. It seems like distortion and CA can be fixed easily in post, and you can always compensate for vignetting by getting closer and cropping. Bokeh and bokeh fringing might be harder to fix though, unless you want to blur each photo manually.
Also how much weight do you give to Photozone's test results compared to SLR Gear or Pop Photo or other tests? I find Pop Photo's subjective quality ratings particularly difficult to wrap my head around it seems well, subjective. Maybe they catch something that the number crunchers miss. Or maybe it's just a way to sell more magazines?
They also test for distortion, vignetting, chromatic aberrations, bokeh, and bokeh fringing. It seems like distortion and CA can be fixed easily in post, and you can always compensate for vignetting by getting closer and cropping. Bokeh and bokeh fringing might be harder to fix though, unless you want to blur each photo manually.
Also how much weight do you give to Photozone's test results compared to SLR Gear or Pop Photo or other tests? I find Pop Photo's subjective quality ratings particularly difficult to wrap my head around it seems well, subjective. Maybe they catch something that the number crunchers miss. Or maybe it's just a way to sell more magazines?