C.H.Ling wrote:
The URL shown the Tokina 80-200 has very low SQF at 135 and 200mm, to me I
consider it unusable (if the test is right).
One of the great problems with these tests is the variation in
individual lens samples and the testing techniques. I notice the Modern
test of the same lens comments on a "slight increase in sharpness at or
near 200mm", which doesn't agree with Pop. Also, the linar distortion
measurements for the 2 tests differ.
I'm a SQF believer, read lot of pop photo reviews (unfortunately they change
the rating standard since some months or a year ago and all has lower value at
20x24), I had the Sigm* 75-300 APO UC which has SQF of 77 as 300mm, I found it
to be a little soft. SQF has to be over 80 to be good.
You could well be right. I don't do the kind of careful testing you do.
And as you pointed out, I don't do slides and don't do large optical
prints of my negs, so I can't see any detail finer than the scanning
resolution. Viewing color negs through a microscope or loupe just makes
me crazy.
Moose
< 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 >
|