jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
| p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Mamiya 645 55mm f/2.8 no infinity focus on EOS-Mirex | |
gdanmitchell wrote:
Maybe it comes from being a college faculty member for a long, long time, but when I saw a lens ranked as a "D" my thought was "below average" and "nearly failing."
Perhaps a numeric designation might work instead?
Dan
Good points, Dan. The original score is numerical, as used in the 24mm-25mm test results that I posted late last year,
Comparison of Zeiss 25/2 ZE and Canon L lenses, https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1403832
The numeric score represents the order of the lens performance (1 = best, 5 = worst of the five lenses tested), averaged over the seven comparison "windows" in the test image, and then normalized so that the best score is set equal to "1.0".
I introduced the letter designation to reduce churn when deciding if "1.0" and "1.3", or "3.2" and "3.5", were significantly different. Going to "A" and "C" for these two number-pairs seemed like a handy shortcut, but you're right, the implication of a "D" grade is pretty dismal, which is definitely not appropriate.
Dan, thanks for the suggestion. I'll go back to the original, numerical order-values. No sense in using a simplification process that introduces new complexity. 
|
