Ohmygod Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
The difference is simply, that you don't have to care much about being scientifically exact in your preparations, as almost everything you can do wrong in a test with a flat object at close distances, is being equalized by the range and the thereby given DOF. And I was at infinity here. I don't know how far away the dish is. I guess it's approximately 300 meters.
Come on, test yours rd4tile! Don't be scared!
I wanted to convince myself, that mine is OK, but after I shot the map on the wall with this second copy last week and saw the unsharp left side, I was afraid that perhaps it wasn't my testing procedure that was faulty, but that it could be the lens, AGAIN! I resorted from doing any more map testing anyway though, as I was fed up with the stress of testing. I missed the feeling of being adventurous and finally wanted to have fun with the lens!
But then the damn dpreview reviewed it and wrote this sentence:
"However it must be noted that our test sample clearly displayed some asymmetry in the optics at close focus distances, with the right side of the frame becoming visibly softer than the left - something which may not be representative of the design as a whole."
After I read that, I felt reminded of the first copy I had. And the problem certainly wouldn't go away if you get further away then a "close distance"! It becomes less apparent, because in most scenes we have objects at different distances, some of which would probably cover it all up. But in landscapes at infinity it becomes clear what is going on! Now some will say, that this is made for action and reportage and not for landscapes. This is partly true - at least we see first incarnation mostly being used in that context. But I don't think that shortcomings due to a defect introduced by sloppy QC and too little time spent into adjusting the product properly should limit the field of application. Even the cheapest Canon lens should be properly centered.
After all, it depends on how picky one is of course and how versatile you want the lens to be. If I wouldn't have noticed any irregularities after a normal RW shooting however, I would never have hung up a map or done a decentering test as well!
But it did show up in landscape pictures, where far away houses would be mush, while other houses at the same distance would be sharp. It showed up when I shot my wife in the grass and trees next to her.
This one is packed and makes it back to the store tomorrow. The shop is a good one though. I'll bring my 5D II as well and probably I can redo some tests there with a few more lenses. Might well be, that I'll take the one I have back home. Should it turn out to be true, that this is a systematic outcome of clumsy QC with all lenses performing equally bad.
Then it's time for Plan B.
Edited on May 10, 2010 at 06:21 PM · View previous versions
|