What do you think (about the table):
[url="http://www.opticallimits.com/samsungnx/707"]http://www.opticallimits.com/samsungnx/707[/url]
Hi Klaus, a quick first reaction;
You have to work on your colours. The red writing of the links on the white-violet back-ground doesn't look good to me.
While for a handful of Samsung lenses this works, how will it look for the army of Nikon tests? Just having a table with hundreds of entries is not going to fly. Any plans on how to provide structure?
enjoy
Hi,
IMO it is quiet good until listed separately for every system. Arrangement by selected data is nice feature <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='  ' />
A.
[quote name='joachim' timestamp='1325847472' post='14387']
Hi Klaus, a quick first reaction;
You have to work on your colours. The red writing of the links on the white-violet back-ground doesn't look good to me.
While for a handful of Samsung lenses this works, how will it look for the army of Nikon tests? Just having a table with hundreds of entries is not going to fly. Any plans on how to provide structure?
[/quote]
That is a problem indeed.
It will not be possible anymore so separate primes and zooms within a manufacturer. It "just doesn't sort".
We will not have "hundreds" of tests except in the total overview list.
I'm not keen on the text representation of the star ratings, which just looks messy. If it isn't too much work maybe create a dedicated graphic set for it?
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
[quote name='popo' timestamp='1325852954' post='14401']
I'm not keen on the text representation of the star ratings, which just looks messy. If it isn't too much work maybe create a dedicated graphic set for it?
[/quote]
This is not meant to be the final version - just a concept.
Visual tuning will be applied, of course.
Did I give the wrong sort of feedback? Still, that was the only thing that sprang to mind when I looked at it. Is ok for me other than that.
Playing with it a little more, I suspect it is sorting on the text string, not the effective rating score, so that would take some "tuning" too.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
It is similar to the original database you had many years ago. I woudl actually prefer a bit more spacing between the lenses and marginally larger font.
I think what a lot of places do is first list zooms (or primes) then follow with primes (or zooms). I'm mixed as to whether primes/zoom should/should not be mixed.
[quote name='you2' timestamp='1325854706' post='14407']
It is similar to the original database you had many years ago. I woudl actually prefer a bit more spacing between the lenses and marginally larger font.
I think what a lot of places do is first list zooms (or primes) then follow with primes (or zooms). I'm mixed as to whether primes/zoom should/should not be mixed.
[/quote]
Yes, this gave an outcry the last time I tried it. :-)
Sebastian came up with the idea of grouping zooms and primes - this would be possible.
However, I suspect that the sorting by name/or focal length will not be optimal because it will be sorted by string and not by number.
Cool to have a sorting possibility... But the star ratings can be more readable. For example ***+ to **** instead of ***+ - ****... But I'm afraid then we loose the correct sorting possibility, right?
Anyhow, it will be a very valuable database... Thanks in advance.
Serkan
|
