Steve Spencer
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
|
 Re: Jordan at Admiring Light reviews Sony FE 70-200f/2.8 GM | |
snapsy wrote:
Steve Spencer wrote:
snapsy wrote:
lightskyland wrote:
Why are his conclusions so different from the various reviewers who have slagged the lens as unsharp?
Is this sample variation?
I don't think so since Lens Rentals found the same relative performance on all the copies they tested. I think it's just a matter of different expectations and not directly comparing it to the Canikon alternatives.
Actually, I don't think Lens Rentals has every published variation data on the FE 70-200 f/2.8 GM. The one copy they tested they said was middle of the road and they did say most lenses had issues, but I suspect there still might be a lot of copy to copy variation in performance at each focal length. Roger has noted that he is not 100% sure that he is getting best focus with this lens because there are 2 different focussing groups. It seems very likely the tests are fine, but he can't be sure. Perhaps that is why they haven't published the variation data.
They didn't but Roger said the copy he published the measurements from represented the average performance of a large set of copies tested. Here's what he wrote in response to a reader who said the Sony must have been a bad copy:
"Mr. T - I don't disagree the bad copy of the Sony, but this was middle of the pack from a fairly large set we tested on the bench. On the other hand, as we've mentioned, these were all early copies."
Source
Yes, but we still don't have the copy variation data. I totally trust Roger that the data is published in middle of the pack data, but how wide is the pack. That is a different issue and one we don't have data on.
|
