p.2 #1 · How accurate is www.the-digital-picture.com?
For me The Digital Picture and Photozone are the "go to" lens testing sites, they have really helped me a lot. Mind you the Authority on lens testing must be Roger Cicala, his articles and tests just amaze me. Aside from his great knowledge and meticulousness, it always blows my mind that he takes sample lenses apart for evaluation, and then rebuilds them! Now that's inside knowledge of a very high order.
p.2 #2 · How accurate is www.the-digital-picture.com?
David Baldwin wrote:
For me The Digital Picture and Photozone are the "go to" lens testing sites, they have really helped me a lot. Mind you the Authority on lens testing must be Roger Cicala, his articles and tests just amaze me. Aside from his great knowledge and meticulousness, it always blows my mind that he takes sample lenses apart for evaluation, and then rebuilds them! Now that's inside knowledge of a very high order.
p.2 #4 · How accurate is www.the-digital-picture.com?
I like TDP.com, too. As far my experience shows me it gives reliable information.
But at least I read different pages too, before I decide to be interested in a lens. Than I usually try to borrow/test it and compare the info, before I pull the trigger.
Keep always in mind that there are copies of different quality out there of any lens. The only lenses I saw only good copies till today are 70-200 4.0 L IS and 100 L.
Ralph
Jan 05, 2013 at 04:39 AM
Guest
Guest
p.2 #5 · How accurate is www.the-digital-picture.com?
I like TDP and don't find it too biased in favour of Canon - the owner just states that Canon lenses are in many cases better overall than the other brands and apparently isn't as mindful of cost effectiveness as the other reviewers so he just states "go for Canon".
In the 100~105 macro faceoff, I'd go with Canon as well since I tried the Sigma and it put me off because of slow and hesitant AF and scratchy manual focus.
Speaking for myself, there hasn't been an occasion when I was choosing a lens based on reviews (as I don't buy lenses often) but mostly went with the "consensus" (like with the staple 16-35 and 70-200 zooms). The only exception was the 24-85 USM of which I've read a few reviews before concluding that it's a decent midrange zoom (and it is) and pulling the trigger.
I'm reading all the abovementioned review sites (TDP, DPReview, Photozone, SLRGear, Lenstip) but I might also add another one - www.slrlensreview.com - which has an interesting database that includes some lenses not covered by other reviewers, like the Sigma 14mm f/2.8 that I own. Unfortunately of late this site isn't updating nearly as often as even the Photozone (which looks like it's in a semi-dormant state as of now) and has largely veered off into the rangefinder/mirrorless territory, contrary to its name. But the older reviews are all up and seem pretty accurate.
p.2 #6 · How accurate is www.the-digital-picture.com?
Despite the lone naysayer grinding his old axe here, like everyone else I find the-digital-picture very useful. I used it to decide to buy a non-Canon lens, my first and only major non-Canon lens purchase. Wow! How can that be?
Especially useful are the lens resolution chart comparisons, which seem to be so carefully done that they accord with generally reported experience considering all parts of the lens's images. Also useful in my decision was Photozone.
p.2 #7 · How accurate is www.the-digital-picture.com?
When I looked at the ISO crops at the site for the Canon 35F1.4, Canon 35F2 IS and the Canon 35 F2, it looked like the F2 IS version was sharper than the others, including the L, at F2. I am curious about how much sample variation there might be, and if the results are just limited to the focus distance of the test.
p.2 #10 · How accurate is www.the-digital-picture.com?
artyH wrote:
When I looked at the ISO crops at the site for the Canon 35F1.4, Canon 35F2 IS and the Canon 35 F2, it looked like the F2 IS version was sharper than the others, including the L, at F2. I am curious about how much sample variation there might be, and if the results are just limited to the focus distance of the test.
I saw that too, and it looked really impressive for the new 35/2 IS! At least we know this sample of the the lens is excellent, not a dog. So we have good reason for high expectations.
But like everything, consult multiple sources to be as confident as possible before purchase.
As Tom said, nothing compares to having the lens on camera for your own testing!
p.2 #13 · How accurate is www.the-digital-picture.com?
Snopchenko wrote:
I like TDP and don't find it too biased in favour of Canon - the owner just states that Canon lenses are in many cases better overall than the other brands and apparently isn't as mindful of cost effectiveness as the other reviewers so he just states "go for Canon".
Yeah but why do all his Tamron samples look like a joke? I mean his 70-300 VC looks like he smeared vasoline over it before trying it at 300mm. And same for the others. (and the much earlier tests on there, in general, are basically questionable since used a very weak procedure involving few trials some of which even used AF!! they did improve the procedure radically though since those days)
A side note, some sites refocus for edges and corners and some don't, some use targets near MFD and some a bit farther and some much farther, that stuff can make a huge difference. A lens might seem to have awful edges near MFD without refocus and yet deliver better performance in the field, on average, at a typical landscape distance and scenario, etc.
all that said, it's still certainly worth a look and a read, in addition to using many other sources
p.2 #14 · How accurate is www.the-digital-picture.com?
David Baldwin wrote:
For me The Digital Picture and Photozone are the "go to" lens testing sites, they have really helped me a lot. Mind you the Authority on lens testing must be Roger Cicala, his articles and tests just amaze me. Aside from his great knowledge and meticulousness, it always blows my mind that he takes sample lenses apart for evaluation, and then rebuilds them! Now that's inside knowledge of a very high order.
These are the three I have learnt the most from.
I agree in part, Roger does a great job and the only person I know who tends to test big batches of lenses. But often only tests resolution and robustness.
Lenstips is the most comprehensive testing I tend to read and covers a lot more attributes than the others.
p.2 #16 · How accurate is www.the-digital-picture.com?
ChrisRD wrote:
I think TDP is one of the better review sites...but I have to agree that the ISO charts do not always reflect my own experiences with certain lenses.
p.2 #17 · How accurate is www.the-digital-picture.com?
The TDP reviews are generally quite thorough and comprehensive although much of what they write is a rehash of the Canon specs/features and physical descriptions, and they are weak on practical lens assessment.
A noteworthy exception to that is when they documented a weakness in the MkII supertelephoto lenses......to my knowledge they were the first to do that, and are still amongst only a few folks who have done so.
Of all the review sites I do pay some attention to what P-zone have to say.
However, my most valued lens/camera info resource is in fact a couple of senior FM members and very active photographers who have no review web sites to draw traffic to, nor they sell gear, seminars and such, but they have used a goodly variety of gears for quality photography. I like to compare my notes with theirs.
p.2 #18 · How accurate is www.the-digital-picture.com?
PetKal wrote:
The TDP reviews are generally quite thorough and comprehensive although much of what they write is a rehash of the Canon specs/features and physical descriptions, and they are weak on practical lens assessment.
A noteworthy exception to that is when they documented a weakness in the MkII supertelephoto lenses......to my knowledge they were the first to do that, and are still amongst only a few folks who have done so.
Of all the review sites I do pay some attention to what P-zone have to say.
However, my most valued lens/camera info resource is in fact a couple of senior FM members and very active photographers who have no review web sites to draw traffic to, nor they sell gear, seminars and such, but they have used a goodly variety of gears for quality photography. I like to compare my notes with theirs....Show more →
..or you could just ask Peter! He knows everything.
p.2 #19 · How accurate is www.the-digital-picture.com?
He he....far from it......but I know who to ask, and I usually have lenses of interest to me already in my possession so I can test them myself.....over months and years of use.
