[PuxaVida]

Your study shows that the 15-22mm interval can be less important, because there's less pixel area in that region than the other parts. That's mathematically correct and valuable information, but not valid for all cases... Considering the landscape photography with wide angles, this intervall means really something, which cannot be evaluated by utilizing mathematically correct statements.



The newer PZ reviews show center, border and extreme border MTF results. Furthermore, the sample shots are always there to evaluate the frame from center to border in all directions. I mean there must always be an improvement area but I think that's as good as it gets on the MTF side if we consider that there are also other image quality criterias to report.



Serkan

[genotypewriter]

[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1297765167' post='6125']

Your study shows that the 15-22mm interval can be less important, because there's less pixel area in that region than the other parts. That's mathematically correct and valuable information, but not valid for all cases... Considering the landscape photography with wide angles, this intervall means really something, which cannot be evaluated by utilizing mathematically correct statements.

[/quote]

Well I can't ever remember saying that they shouldn't check for "extreme border"... like the OP suggested, they can still check for only 3 points but instead of "border" then can test that region that's roughly centered around the 12mm mark.





[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1297765167' post='6125']

Furthermore, the sample shots are always there to evaluate the frame from center to border in all directions.

[/quote]

Well the reason why we come to places like photozone is because there are supposedly comparable results, unlike sample shots. If sample shots say much then there's flickr <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



GTW

[PuxaVida]

[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1297808100' post='6140']



Well the reason why we come to places like photozone is because there are supposedly comparable results, unlike sample shots. If sample shots say much then there's flickr <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



GTW

[/quote]



I was referring to controlled sample shots + lab data combo as a whole package. Flickr gives you more sample shots than you need <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />...