I guess we have to agree to disagree and drop it. You said \"the 100/2.0 outperforms the 100/2.8 in the center and in the corner, also at large apertures, at infinity and at 1:2\" and that just does not jive at all! Sure evidence is a good thing. Pleas test your two lenses and start a new thread called CZ-CY vs. CZ-EF or something. I did my tests already. I would love to read your review of the two lenses - seriously! More information is always good! I selected the CY version on purpose because after spending a full day testing (as scientifically as possible) several copies of each CZ 100 that existed at the shop there the C/Y was the winner. That included several copies of the new CZ in Nikon mount. \"ZF\" right? I shot buildings, trees, test charts, signboards, in-shop posters, and macros of various things all on a tripod - and then compared using the last version of Capture One 4 (4.x).
I guess we have to agree to disagree and drop it. You said \"the 100/2.0 outperforms the 100/2.8 in the center and in the corner, also at large apertures, at infinity and at 1:2\" and that just does not jive at all! Sure evidence is a good thing. Pleas test your two lenses and start a new thread called CZ-CY vs. CZ-EF or something. I did my tests already. I would love to read your review of the two lenses - seriously! More information is always good! I selected the CY version on purpose because after spending a full day testing (as scientifically as possible) several copies of each CZ 100 that existed at the shop there the C/Y was the winner. That included several copies of the new CZ in Nikon mount. \"ZF\" right? I shot buildings, trees, test charts, signboards, in-shop posters, and macros of various things all on a tripod - and then compared using the last version Capture One 4 (4.x).
Mar 09, 2012 at 12:08 PM
Previous versions of Bifurcator's message #10422823 « CV vs CZ »
