>
>I'd like to add one conclusion I came to while doing this comparison,
and surfing thru some
>other lens tests on the photodo site. That is: If I were to change
systems, (which I ain't) based on the test
>results I looked at, especially when filtered thru the 'Anderscope', I
would go with Canon
>without hesitation, at least for lens quality. Their lenses were
consistently better than comparable
>Nikons, from the 28-70 zoom up thru the 400/2.8 to 600/4 telephotos.
This surprised me. But
>there it is. Also, while Tokina, Tamron and Sigma do have a couple of
fine performers, they
>seemed, on average, to be of lesser quality than the mfg lenses. This
did not surprise.
>
All this test data only made me start lusting after Leica! I've *got*
to stop browsing the photodo data!
>There was one Nikon lens to die for: the 80-200/2.8 ED IF. Score =
4.1 and had good
> performance at 2.8 and good 40lpmm #.
>
That is outstanding performance for a zoom. Incredible, really. Most
zooms are in the 3.0 range. There was a pro at the last shoot that had
one. It is huge, over a foot long I think.
But, what I found surprising was the performance of Mamiya MF lenses
vs. Hassleblad. Now, I've always operated under the assumption that
hassey was king of the hill (KOTH) in the MF field. Well, the lenses
for the Mamiya 6 and 7 are really great, and measure better than Hassey
lenses. go figure.
Be seeing you.
Dirk Wright
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|