While the infinity shot @ f8 may be \"standard\" requirement for some, others do value seeing how a lens performs @ mfd or other nearer distances. Not all lenses are optimized to infinity, and just because it is a WA/UWA doesn\'t mean that it performs the same way. Good performance at 30+ meters doesn\'t mean it is better at close distance ... I have Oly\'s and Nikon\'s (understood @ not RF) in the same FL (28mm & 21/20mm) that deliver differently from one another at different distances.
Making a gauntlet style blanket statement that infinity testing tells all you need to know is a bit folly, imo. Given the tremendous amount of \"it\'s usable\" language that has been promoted in this thread, the same should apply to \"its usable\" for street even if not ideal for landscape ... i.e. it cuts both ways, not just the way you want it to be.
BTW ... if shooting close is what makes one a troll, then I\'m a troll.
While the infinity shot @ f8 may be \"standard\" requirement for some, others do value seeing how a lens performs @ mfd or other nearer distances. Not all lenses are optimized to infinity, and just because it is a WA/UWA doesn\'t mean that it performs the same way. Good performance at 30+ meters doesn\'t mean it is better at close distance ... I have Oly\'s and Nikon\'s (understood @ not RF) in the same FL (28mm & 21/20mm) that deliver differently from one another at different distances.
Making a gauntlet style blanket statement that infinity testing tells all you need to know is a bit folly, imo. Given the tremendous amount of \"it\'s usable\" language that has been promoted in this thread, the same should apply to \"its usable\" for street even if not ideal for landscape ... i.e. it cuts both ways, not just the way you want it to be.
Dec 08, 2013 at 01:30 PM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #11987690 « A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses »
