12-12-2011, 12:53 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-12-2011, 01:02 PM by Brightcolours.)
[quote name='Sammy' timestamp='1323693458' post='13654']
Nor does it exclude that the slrgear sample was indeed perfectly sharp...
[/quote]
Of course it does not. But many of their reviews containing the weirdest findings/data makes them very unreliable, and that was my point. We can't trust which reviews are "accurate" and which are not, from SLRgear. Which then includes the review of this lens.
of course, it also can be possible that the PZ test(s) are flawed in some way too. But one would need to be able to dig deeper to examine things, in order to conclude that.
What I do not is that I do not trust SLRgear. Even if they would give a great review to a lens I happen to like.
Nor does it exclude that the slrgear sample was indeed perfectly sharp...
[/quote]
Of course it does not. But many of their reviews containing the weirdest findings/data makes them very unreliable, and that was my point. We can't trust which reviews are "accurate" and which are not, from SLRgear. Which then includes the review of this lens.
of course, it also can be possible that the PZ test(s) are flawed in some way too. But one would need to be able to dig deeper to examine things, in order to conclude that.
What I do not is that I do not trust SLRgear. Even if they would give a great review to a lens I happen to like.