No worries, Rover, I don't mind at all, in fact I'm really glad for your's (and other's) hints, very welcome!
-- Markus
Quote:Well, not sure that's going to happen soon (we haven't discussed it internally so far though). However, if I had to choose a high res system for myself (and if Nikon doesn't come up with a higher res body this year I might have to), the Fuji could be tempting.
-- Markus
Let me know if you do decide to switch to GFX, I may have an idea on how to get you one for a more reasonable price
When LensRentals tests a lens, it's "oh you can't put 10 lenses on a testing bench, you have to do real photography". When Photozone does it, it's "they got a single bad copy and now giving the lens a bad name".
Added near-center values.
Quote:Added near-center values.
Now they'll say that instead of admitting your mistake, you added more values that humiliate the glorious Sony GM lens that is the best 24-70mm lens ever made by anyone.
You can't change reality. numbers are numbers.
That's what makes photozone such an unbiased and reliable source.
Once again thanks Klaus for the excellent effort.
Quote:You can't change reality. numbers are numbers.
That's what makes photozone such an unbiased and reliable source.
Once again thanks Klaus for the excellent effort.
I would always be careful what I measure. Astrology and economics use numbers too. ;-)
Actually I don't understand the fuzz, the review was quite positive. It's a quite usable lens with some drawbacks but nothing you cannot work around.
Quote:I would always be careful what I measure. Astrology and economics use numbers too. ;-)
:lol:
You don't want to say, they're not accurate? All the horoscopes I read are precise, it depends just from the view you take.