Gary;
Thanks for your response. I don't know who Paul Young is or where his
results are posted. Can you shed more light?
I'm certainly not going to defend MP tests, as I've never seen one! But
I presume they were (?) somewhat consistent from one test to the next?
Ie if they tested Zuiko 35 F/2 one month and 35-105 the next, couldn't
we assume that the methodology (and film) used to get the numbers would
have been similar enuf to be ignored when comparing the results?
IOW: maybe their resolution #s are lower than other testers, but when
comparing 2 of their tests, can we trust the comparison?
george
PCA Cala wrote:
>
> Hi George:
>
> > I'm surprised the zooms
> > are even close to the primes and astonished that the #s in many cases
> > are better. Do you (or anyone else) have any thoughts on this? Or is
> > my interpretation of the data faulty?
>
> I never put much merit in the Modern Photography methodology! For one, what
> film were they using over all those years? That makes a big difference.
> Another, how can guys like Paul Young (who has tested many Canon FD lenses and
> has posted on the WWW his resolution results) get way high line pair numbers
> numbers in comparison?
>
> Gary Reese
> Las Vegas, NV
--
george :>)
< 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 >
|