[marco]

 Photozone´s reviews are the most important out there. I would like to know before I pay $1000 and to me that´s more important than what the pope ever says.

I prefer the reviews of Kurt Munger, not so much numbers. Maybe Photozone could remove the ratings at all. There is always a bias in this ratings. There are many studies about ratings, and actually they show that ratings often depend more on emotions, how good was you last meal etc. than what you actually measure.

 

Look at the Lumix G 7-14mm f/4 ASPH, it got 4 stars. Do you get so much better pictures from it?

 

The only aspect which bothers me is the decentering.

[Faketastic]

I prefer the reviews of Kurt Munger, not so much numbers. Maybe Photozone could remove the ratings at all. There is always a bias in this ratings. There are many studies about ratings, and actually they show that ratings often depend more on emotions, how good was you last meal etc. than what you actually measure.

 

Look at the Lumix G 7-14mm f/4 ASPH, it got 4 stars. Do you get so much better pictures from it?

 

The only aspect which bothers me is the decentering.

I agree on Mr. Munger- I really like his conclusions as they are biased towards photography not pixel peeping.

But, being old school, I really like MTF charts and photozone makes it easy to compare lenses without reading a lot of text. Their star rating is strange though (is it a Nikon lens = add one star, a sony lens = take away 1.5 stars).

[marco]

I agree on Mr. Munger- I really like his conclusions as they are biased towards photography not pixel peeping.

But, being old school, I really like MTF charts and photozone makes it easy to compare lenses without reading a lot of text. Their star rating is strange though (is it a Nikon lens = add one star, a sony lens = take away 1.5 stars).

 

"I really like MTF charts and photozone makes it easy to compare lenses without reading a lot of text" Maybe reading pictures would be better? ;-)

 

There are other studies that people get attached to things which is changing their description of the world. Why do you add or remove a star? You mean so it is more pleasant to you?

 

Klaus is offering to you like other and so far I heard him never saying, that his reviews the only one. So why not take them as a part of a puzzle to get a better picture? You can ignore him too. ;-) Or do you believe that you can force him to share your opinion?

[Faketastic]

"I really like MTF charts and photozone makes it easy to compare lenses without reading a lot of text" Maybe reading pictures would be better? ;-)

 

There are other studies that people get attached to things which is changing their description of the world. Why do you add or remove a star? You mean so it is more pleasant to you?

 

Klaus is offering to you like other and so far I heard him never saying, that his reviews the only one. So why not take them as a part of a puzzle to get a better picture? You can ignore him too. ;-) Or do you believe that you can force him to share your opinion?

 

I meant photozone is very Nikon biased. Why shouldn´t I try to help improve a already great site? You dont´t have to defend Klaus as I´m not criticizing him personally. Am I not allowed to judge a lens by looking at the MTF- why is it better to view images instead?

Photozone is the largest collection of MTF data I can find only. As I Sony photographer I think it´s a shame I can´t use this data for the nex system. That's all.

[Klaus]

I meant photozone is very Nikon biased. Why shouldn´t I try to help improve a already great site? You dont´t have to defend Klaus as I´m not criticizing him personally. Am I not allowed to judge a lens by looking at the MTF- why is it better to view images instead?

Photozone is the largest collection of MTF data I can find only. As I Sony photographer I think it´s a shame I can´t use this data for the nex system. That's all.

 

Yeah, sure. Sony users say that we are Nikon biased. Nikon users say we are Canon-centric. MFT users say we hate them.

Take your bet. 

 

Fact is, that all PZ members have used various systems over time. Personally I change my system preference as often as my underwear.

 

In fact I still have a Zeiss 16-80 and Sony 70-300G in my PRIVATE stock - just to mention the obvious.

[soLong]

Yeah, sure......In fact I still have a.....Sony 70-300G in my PRIVATE stock......

 

.....well, mustn't ask what you do with it then....

[Klaus]

.....well, mustn't ask what you do with it then....

Waiting for the a78 ;-)

[Faketastic]

Ok. Forgive me for drawing that conlusion, but, 14 out of 16 of the latest reviews are for Nikon mount lenses. 

[mst]

Ok. Forgive me for drawing that conlusion, but, 14 out of 16 of the latest reviews are for Nikon mount lenses.

That's simply because I finally rushed out lots of reviews that have long been overdue. If you want to judge us by the number of reviews published per system, please take the whole 8 years of photozone testing into account, not just the last few weeks.

-- Markus

[Klaus]

Ok. Forgive me for drawing that conlusion, but, 14 out of 16 of the latest reviews are for Nikon mount lenses. 

 

Yes, but this more a thing between Markus (Nikon, Samsung), Sebastian (MFT) and me (rest).

Every once in a while Markus has a review frenzy before hibernating again (e.g. Q4 2012 was rather dull in Nikon land). 

I'm trying to keep my output to a constant 3ish tests per month.

 

Klaus