1.4 / 58 hast just been tested on Lenstip

Started Feb 15, 2014 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Senior MemberPosts: 5,331Gear list
Re: Nonsense....
In reply to brightcolours, Feb 18, 2014

brightcolours wrote:

sgoldswo wrote:

brightcolours wrote:

Stacey_K wrote:

sgoldswo wrote:

You are correct that I don't know why they do it (I have made assumptions) but do it they do...

My guess would be they feel their "base" are canon shooters that delight in any negative conclusion they post on non-canon products.

This is what they conclude about the (much sharper) Canon EF 50mm f1.2 L USM:

"The Canon EF 50 mm f/1.2L USM is a new, expensive lens which belongs to the high-end L series. In the case of such devices I should have had problems with finding anything which could be put into the cons section. Here I didn’t have such problems – the lens had plenty of slip-ups during the test, in some categories losing to devices over ten times cheaper…"

It seems you two are biassed, not Lenstip.

-- hide signature --


I don't think they are biased against nikon, they are sometimes biased against lenses that don't meet with their test chart based criteria (which has value, but is a pretty simplistic view of the world). Other times they hate lenses and it's not even clear why. This happens across brands.

Yes, they only look at the measurements and less at the applications of a lens. That is true. Photozone does the same, lately to a lesser extent.

For big aperture non-tele lenses, it is less important on how the border performance is. Because the subject usually is not in the border, and how sharp the rest is is of little importance with shallow DOF. And for macro lenses, they do not get tested at macro distances due to the sizes of the testing targets.

One has to look at the reviews for what they have tested, and make up your own final conclusions taking your own interests into consideration.

If you mean that I'm biased against taking Lenstip seriously because of the bombast in conclusions, you are entirely right.

At times I also ignore those comments, but still value some/most of their measurements as informative.

Agreed - the tests have value, just as the tests published by the likes of DXO have value. In fact the commentary on the test results is actually useful in that it has developed my own understanding over time. I just don't get the "this lens is rubbish because another lens has sharper corners" style of some conclusions. It's a bit trashy for a site which otherwise is intellectual in its approach.

A lens is a lens - I might consider a modern portrait lens too sharp, or too clinical, but I can make my own mind up on that.

I do find it a bit concerning that we seem to have ended up with a sharpness/contrast race with respect to lenses to mirror the megapixel race in cameras and these kind of bombastic comments only fuel that sort of thing. Before we know it all lenses will render the same and photography will be a poorer place for that.

 sgoldswo's gear list:sgoldswo's gear list
Leica Q Leica M Typ 240 Nikon Df Nikon D810 Nikon D750 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow