11-26-2010, 11:45 AM
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1290771568' post='4466']
Camera-based tests are never cross comparable. They never were and they never will be. Neither here at PZ nor elsewhere.
The tests provide a base on which you can rank a lens vs other lenses tested on the same camera-lens combination. This rank will remain the same or very similar on a different camera.
If I didn't remove the AA filter on the K5 I could as well stick to the K10D. The only point of restarting the tests is to do it on a higher (effective) resolution. This is a completely different question than whether the K5 is good or bad. We will not test the K5 here at PZ - the whole point of our sample is to do lens testing with it.
[/quote]
But you compared the k5 to the k10 and even the a33!
K5 @ 16mp:
max. 2500 LW/PH (RAW)
max. 2050 LW/PH (JPEG ****)
For comparison:
A33 @ 14mp:
max. 2850 LW/PH (RAW)
max. 2500 LW/PH (JPEG)
Maybe be I'm missing something .?
Camera-based tests are never cross comparable. They never were and they never will be. Neither here at PZ nor elsewhere.
The tests provide a base on which you can rank a lens vs other lenses tested on the same camera-lens combination. This rank will remain the same or very similar on a different camera.
If I didn't remove the AA filter on the K5 I could as well stick to the K10D. The only point of restarting the tests is to do it on a higher (effective) resolution. This is a completely different question than whether the K5 is good or bad. We will not test the K5 here at PZ - the whole point of our sample is to do lens testing with it.
[/quote]
But you compared the k5 to the k10 and even the a33!
K5 @ 16mp:
max. 2500 LW/PH (RAW)
max. 2050 LW/PH (JPEG ****)
For comparison:
A33 @ 14mp:
max. 2850 LW/PH (RAW)
max. 2500 LW/PH (JPEG)
Maybe be I'm missing something .?