Steve Spencer wrote:
So let me get this straight. If the Otus outperforms the top 50s from Nikon and Canon in sharpness, bokeh, reduced chromatic aberrations in the focus plane, reduced chromatic aberrations out of the focus plane, better close up performance, and only is as good as the Canikon lenses on vignetting then because it doesn\'t beat them in this last aspect, but only in effect ties them, it isn\'t doesn\'t really go far enough. (abandons sarcasm) I think the Otus would typically produce better results, and I am pretty sure that in any situation at any aperture in which CA might be an issue the Otus would produce better results.
The fallacy here is to regard it as some type of competition or ranking between lenses, instead of asking whether it allows the photographer to make photos that they could not make before. It really is pointless asking which of three trains to the airport, none of which get there before check-in closes, arrives earliest.
There seems little doubt, based on the last few posts, that paired with one particular $3000 body from Nikon this lens is close to perfect in practice. But that\'s not the same thing as being able to put an Otus on any modern full frame from Canon or Nikon and get perfect results. It greatly affects the value proposition for those not already posessing that body.
