PDA

View Full Version : Photozones' lens test credibility



Rooz
07-31-2008, 03:45 PM
ok, yesterday i had the chance to shoot with the 17-35/2.8 and 20/2.8, (yes i'm preparing for the d700 and looking for a good WA), and following that i'm beginning to seriously doubt either the methodology or the credibility of photozone. the 20mm is now another lens i've tested that produces significantly different results than what photozone implies.

the 300/4 is my sharpest lens but on photozone the res figures dont indicate that. maybe a freak lens ? hmmm then the 35/2...again, sharp and contrasty..maybe a freak lens ? hmmm then the 85/1.8...poor contrast and soft at large apertures...maybe a freak lens ? hmmm then the 85/1.4...sharp, sharp, sharp. maybe a freak lens ? hmmm

now the 20/2.8. its crisp and sharp as a tack. the contrast is as good as the 35/2. and again, photozones tests indicate its not really that sharp. certianly not sharper than the 17-35 which i found to be untrue. freak lens' again ? i think NOT. this is starting to get farscial.

that many lens' used and or owned personally cannot be just co-incidence and by chance. moral to the story...take photozone with a grain of salt cos i'm finding real world usage of some of the lens' there to be grossly out of sync with their tests. for me, photozone is out as a resource.

K1W1
07-31-2008, 04:35 PM
moral to the story...take photozone with a grain of salt


But it's on the Internet so therefore it must be true.

Hang on what you wrote is also on the Internet so that must be true as well.

Now I'm confused. :confused:


Actually I only ever treat anything I read in printed or electronic media as a guide including on this site. As far as lenses are concerned reviews tell me physical stuff like how big it is and what it looks like but I spend time going through SmugMug and Flickr to see what real world shots come out like from a wide variety of photographers to try to asses what is working and what is not. Personally I don't take very many studio shots of test grids so those sort of images are no use to me anyway.

e_dawg
07-31-2008, 09:26 PM
Photozone does generally good testing. I usually look at their tests along with SLRgear.com.

XaiLo
08-02-2008, 01:39 AM
I enjoy the Kiwi method myself, if I was shooting newspaper articles all day long it might be a different story. ;)

Gintaras
08-02-2008, 06:23 AM
Rooz, were not this YOU who told me "this is a man behind camera who matters" ??? now i see you planning to trade your almost brand new D300 for D700 :confused::confused::confused::p

Rooz
08-02-2008, 06:33 AM
Rooz, were not this YOU who told me "this is a man behind camera who matters" ??? now i see you planning to trade your almost brand new D300 for D700 :confused::confused::confused::p

not a trade. the d300 is not going anywhere my good man. :)

Gintaras
08-02-2008, 08:04 AM
oh Rooz, have you discovered a gold mine or bought a money printing press? D300+D700= heck a lot of Aussie dollars:p

Gintaras
08-02-2008, 08:06 AM
damn, you make me lose my sleep, i want D700 NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! my wife must start learning to save ..... :eek::D

JTL
08-02-2008, 08:24 AM
not a trade. the d300 is not going anywhere my good man. :)You have discovered The Golden Combo...the D700 and the D300 as a kit (I'm officially coining the phrase "The Golden Combo". When you see people referring to it in the future, you'll know it came from me!) Once shooters realize the gift they have been given...they too will see the light...the golden light!

Just a few more lenses to fill in the gaps and The Golden Combo will be complete...

e_dawg
08-02-2008, 11:06 AM
Catchy ;)

When did you get your D700? And how do you like your 24-85 and 28-300 lenses?

JTL
08-02-2008, 02:29 PM
Catchy ;)

When did you get your D700? And how do you like your 24-85 and 28-300 lenses?Got the D700 on the evening of 7/30. And, I like the 24-85, even though some people knock the lens. I don't think it's a lens you can generalize about because variation from one copy to the next seems fairly wide. I find it a fine lens for the price...but then again, my copy is very good and I've used it before on a Nikon F6 so there were no surprises there. I expected it perform on the D700 and it does.

As far as the Tamron 28-300 VC goes...the jury is still out. I have to shoot it a lot more to decide whether I'm keeping it. It didn't do so well at the ball game I went to the other night...but...it's a slow lens and it was my first time shooting it (and the D700) so that's not a fair situation to judge it by. I need a day of walking around and shooting with it, because that's what it's for....walking around, hiking, etc, in daylight. I already know it won't be good for "critical" shooting...so, I'm waiting till Photokina and for the subsequent Nikon lens announcements before I commit to any more lenses. I really thought I was going to get the 24-70 f/2.8 but if they come out with a 24-120 constant f/4 (or any improvement to the current 24-120) that's what I think I'm really looking for...

Sorry Rooz!!! We've hi-jacked your thread!

To get back on topic...I find Photozone a useful source for comparing lens spec info and I think they generally get it right, but by only testing lenses on APS-C cameras I think they are doing their readers a disservice ;). But, I always take ANY review/opinion with a grain of salt...and common sense dictates that everyone else should as well...

XaiLo
08-02-2008, 03:56 PM
Congrats on the camera JTL! :)

Rooz
08-02-2008, 06:35 PM
oh Rooz, have you discovered a gold mine or bought a money printing press? D300+D700= heck a lot of Aussie dollars:p

well, my backup camera right now is an 850IS. lol if for whatever reason the d300 goes wrong or i bust it then i got nothign to shoot with.

i'm just waiting a little while longer for the 6d. i wanna be 100% sure before i throw my money down.

JTL
08-03-2008, 12:44 AM
well, my backup camera right now is an 850IS. lol if for whatever reason the d300 goes wrong or i bust it then i got nothign to shoot with.

i'm just waiting a little while longer for the 6d. i wanna be 100% sure before i throw my money down.LOL! Now that really would be something...me with a D700 and you with the new Canon! :D:D:D

erichlund
08-06-2008, 02:10 PM
OK, I know I've told people that the Nikkor 35 f2 is a nice little lens, and Rooz, you really took it to heart. Yes. It is. However...

The problem is not putting it up against a zoom like the 17-35 (a very good zoom, but still a zoom). Put it up against a Zeiss Distagon 35 f2. Of course, you'll have to manually focus the Zeiss, but it is better optically. Or, the Nikkor 35 f1.4 AIS. Again, better optically.

Also, remember, any decent lens is going to give very good results if you stay in it's sweet spot. Your panda photos are a perfect example. Great light, great exposures, therefore, great photos. Doesn't mean there isn't better glass. It just means that generally speaking, we worry too much about things like resolution. Accurate focus is probably way more important than the lens' tested resolution.

In that last regard, there are certain lenses that focus more accurately than others, and ways you can improve your focus on the less reliable lenses. Of course, the camera body makes a difference with AF, and the D300 is a good one, so that helps. Generally speaking, I find the focus on primes much more reliable than on zooms, though the "Pro" zooms like my 17-55DX do very well.

As an aside, while on a trip last week, I stopped by a camera store and handled a D700. It's a darn good thing I'm so broke. ;-) Of course, the guy handed it to me with the 85mm f1.4 attached. OMG. Best candid snap I ever took of my wife. Not my card, unfortunately, plus, the background was camera store (but nicely blurred :-)) Unfortunately, I'm struck with lust and no way to assuage it.

Rooz
01-21-2009, 03:09 PM
the new 50/1.4G test is up on photozone now and it again makes me question any such testing. having been the owner of all 3 50's at one point or another, i know for a fact that the G is sharper than all of them but this test indicates otherwise. only fractional improvements wide open and when stopped down the 1.4D showed a better result.

http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/413-nikkor_50_14g?start=1

the more and more i use different lens' and "rent" them, (ie: buy and then sell), the more i realise that these lens tests are a poor substitute for using the lens yourself and making your own determinations. either i'm getting freak lens' or soemthing is up with my eyes.

erichlund
01-21-2009, 04:20 PM
I've never found photozone to be particularly reliable. However, I also cannot comment on your perceptions. I'm not saying you are wrong, but neither have you posted the results of objective tests.

It's also hard to say because they were not tested side by side on the same sensor. Of note is that where the 1.4D does pull slightly ahead, both are so far above the nyquist frequency (about 1500, though that's taken from the 50mm f1.4D test on DPReview) that none of us will actually see a difference. DPReview doesn't show as high a resolution figure as Photozone, so their testing methods are clearly different.

Frankly, you may be seeing nothing more than some sample variation and slight focusing errors. An AF-S lens is more likely to have smaller focusing errors if you use a lot of AF-C, because it is quicker and less likely to be off focus at any given time.

TheWengler
01-21-2009, 08:05 PM
For the 4 lenses I've owned the results seem to be as expected based on the Photozone reviews.

Rooz
01-21-2009, 08:18 PM
Frankly, you may be seeing nothing more than some sample variation and slight focusing errors. An AF-S lens is more likely to have smaller focusing errors if you use a lot of AF-C, because it is quicker and less likely to be off focus at any given time.

yes this is true.

Cyberwlf
01-21-2009, 09:18 PM
Having read this thread its only now just become aparent to me how much spending Rooz has done on gear (yeah ive seen the sig many times, but now im paying greater attention to it!). I want access to Rooz's bank account too to find this endless pot of gold :P

BTW Side note, where do you usually sell your gear Rooz?

Rooz
01-21-2009, 09:26 PM
i have a note somewhere at home of my lens' bought/ sold. there is a heck of alot of them. when i get home i'll post it up. you'd be surprised at how little money i've actually lost going thru them all. i think i'm down around $500 in total. (i actually sold the 70-200VR ad 18-200VR for more than i bought them !!). the majority of lens sales have been thru ebay.

Turo
01-21-2009, 10:42 PM
i have a note somewhere at home of my lens' bought/ sold. there is a heck of alot of them. when i get home i'll post it up. you'd be surprised at how little money i've actually lost going thru them all. i think i'm down around $500 in total. (i actually sold the 70-200VR ad 18-200VR for more than i bought them !!). the majority of lens sales have been thru ebay.

I've actually made money on lenses also. I almost always buy used (simply because I can't really afford new stuff at the moment), but I've been good/lucky about buying low and selling high. Hell, my old 35-70mm I bought for $350 USD and sold it for $471! Gotta love ebay :D

Rooz
01-22-2009, 12:31 AM
previously owned lens', (i think thats all of them !), some were returned immediatey the rest were sold after a period of use.

tamron 90/2.8 - wanted better AF
tamron 17-50/2.8 - 2 lens failures out of the box (returned)
sigma 10-20 - wanted something sharper
sigma 18-50/2.8 - no afs
sigma 150/2.8 - too big to hand hold
tokina 11-16 - lens fault (returned)
nikkor 85/1.8 - no afs, poor contrast at large aperture
nikkor 50/1.8 - no afs, upgraded to 1.4d
nikkor 50/1.4D - no afs
nikkor 18-135 - kit lens with d80
nikkor 16-85VR - not fast enuf (returned)
nikkor 70-300VR - 300/4 prime better quality
nikkor 18-200VR - not sharp enuf or fast enuf
nikkor 70-200/2.8VR - rarely used after i bought the 300/4

craigyc
01-22-2009, 12:26 PM
wow you've had alot of lenses! Im going to sell my 50 1.8 on ebay this weekend to fund a tamron 90mm 2.8 I think.

Hopefully I can get almost as much as I initially payed for it! that would be a result.

Cyberwlf
01-28-2009, 09:06 AM
What was the lens fault with your Tokina Rooz? Got mine the other day, but not experienced any issues with it yet (that i've noticed..)

jeisner
02-01-2009, 06:56 PM
The best for making money, for me, was the voigtlander 125mm f2.5 macro. In pentax mount I bought it new and then sold on ebay not even a year later and doubled my money (short production run)... I believe it is still rising in value...

Rooz
02-01-2009, 07:02 PM
that lens gets huge wraps. would love to be able to try one.
(i think its that one anyway.)

craigyc
02-02-2009, 12:53 AM
Sold my 50mm 1.8 yesterday on ebay. Bought brand new for 80 and sold for 120!

Result!