alundeb Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
gdanmitchell wrote:
DXO has the veneer of objectivity and, as a result, gets a lot of attention. But the context is so complex and often of questionable relevance to real photography that the results often do not mean what the "values" assigned to lenses seem to suggest.
A simple test is to make some photographs with the lenses in question (likely the 16-35 f/2.8 L II, 17-40 f/4 L, and 16-35mm f/4 L IS) and look at photographic results. In terms of the real world effect of choosing among these lenses, this will be a lot clearer and straightforward than trying to sleuth out what the DXO numbers do and do not mean.
Dan...Show more →
If it only was that easy. First, we need access to the lenses in question. Then we need to do everything right in the test. This requires some skills and thoughtfullness. Many members here on FM are up to that tasks, but there are also many examples of home made tests that are directly misleading.
Regarding DxO numbers, I do not recommend trying to interpret the metrics and scores, as they are obscure and represent some odd weighting choices. My point in the response above was only that you cannot use the oddity in the scores to dismiss the individual measurements without even bothering to read the explanation. Looking at the field maps or profiles gives fast access to a general idea of how many lenses perform at the magnification / subject distance used in the test.
|