07-10-2011, 08:46 AM
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1310214539' post='9860']
The numbers are absolutely meaningless for comparisons between two systems.
[/quote]
Yes, I know but imho 5 rating scales are enough, 7 rating scales like photozone did on the new Oly. 14-150, just does not help to get an overview. Also the rating scales are not rated <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> I prefer the canon way, where you made the results directly comparable (forget about the numbers)
http://www.opticallimits.com/canon-eos/392-sigma_50_14_canon?start=1
http://www.opticallimits.com/canon-eos/522-sigma50f14eosff?start=1
http://www.opticallimits.com/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/645-oly_m14150_456?start=1
regards
The numbers are absolutely meaningless for comparisons between two systems.
[/quote]
Yes, I know but imho 5 rating scales are enough, 7 rating scales like photozone did on the new Oly. 14-150, just does not help to get an overview. Also the rating scales are not rated <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> I prefer the canon way, where you made the results directly comparable (forget about the numbers)
http://www.opticallimits.com/canon-eos/392-sigma_50_14_canon?start=1
http://www.opticallimits.com/canon-eos/522-sigma50f14eosff?start=1
http://www.opticallimits.com/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/645-oly_m14150_456?start=1
regards