Thanks Schnozz, extreme entertainment!
And you saved me the trouble of finding a good thread and slogging
through it myself.
I was sometimes puzzled when first perusing user "reviews"on places like
FM. Opinions about the same lens would differ so wildly.
After a while, I came to realize that a number of folks have no clue
whatsoever about some photographic concepts
They seem to think that DOF is something fixed, confusing unsharpness of
objects slightly out of the plane of focus that would go completely
unnoticed in an 11x14 print, but are easily visible when pixel peeping,
with lens flaws.
They think that the rule of thumb for hand holdability is absolute. So
they shoot a 300 mm lens at 1/250 on a small sensor, giving a 480 mm eq.
field of view, then pixel peep it and claim the lens is at fault. Shoot
at 1/1000 and suddenly the lens is OK again. :-)
They think IS stops all motion, and complain when fast moving subjects
are fuzzy.
I suspect much of the discussion about QC issues with some lenses is
partly a result of such incompetence on the part of many posters, rather
than real lens variability.
Reading these "reviews" for useful info is something of an art.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|