Shesh,
Really am fuzzy, time to go home.
Proper Link:
http://www.slrgear.com/articles/focus/focus.htm
This slipped by me. 'Member the harsh criticism of SLRgear.com when
testing a Nik lens because of their back focusing? They were quite
defensive and took a beating on many lists. Seems there is some
advantage to having a stable of optics Ph.D.'s available. Perhaps they
fixed the methodology.
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/index.php ;
This was one elephant standing in the room that looks to me to be
nicely addressed.
Would like to see how some of the eagle eyed list members would fare if
provided with a proper focusing screen and magnifying eyepiece---just
for fun. As discussed in a few previous threads the included screens
are quite crummy for fine MF in DSLR's.
Am not implying that other focusing techniques are not perfectly
adequate from a practical perspective, but may not be optimal for
measuring lens performance.
One other elephant in the room is lens sample variability. Wish they
would test 5-10 lenses to get some idea of index of dispersion of their
measurements. As discussed in a few previous threads the included
screens are quite crummy for fine MF in DSLR's.
It also is getting increasingly difficult to separate the optics alone
from the lens/sensor system with some significant manipulations by the
lens CPU prior to analysis.=2
0They commented upon this when testing the
G1---they suspect significant pre-processing and are investigating.
A. Frequently Fuzzy Mike
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|