The true equivalence of the OM-D+75mm vs Canon 5DIII

Started May 25, 2012 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
bobn2 Forum Pro • Posts: 49,926
Re: Very good, indeed...

Steen Bay wrote:

Anders W wrote:

Steen Bay wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

Steen Bay wrote:

Took a quick look, and was a bit surprised to see how well the mFT primes on the GH2 actually were doing vs. Nikon primes on the D4 (maybe relatively strong AA-filter on D4?). Below DxO's lens metric resolution scores, which in this case actually seem to reflect what we see if taking a closer look at the measurements. The resolution score seems to be some kind of average resolution, across the frame and at different f-stops, based upon the MTF-20 figures used for the resolution/profiles graphs.

12/2 --- 53 lp/mm (on 24x36mm, normalized)
25/1.4 - 55 lp/mm
45/1.8 - 49 lp/mm

24/1.4G - 55 lp/mm
50/1.4G - 54 lp/mm
85/1.8D - 54 lp/mm

...but, I would argue that a metric based on such an average is as meaningless as DxOMark's "overall sensor score" and/or DPR's "overall camera score".

I find the "DxOMark Score" for lenses rather useless (or worse, directly misleading), but I kind of like the "Resolution / Lens Metric Score". Of course it doesn't tell the whole story, but it gives a good impression of the overall quality of a lens.

As with the sensor tests, I find the scoring rather questionable. And the examples you give are not really persuasive when it comes to showing that it gives a good impression of the overall quality of a lens. Based on what I already know from other sources, the 24/1.4G is a top-notch performer (though big and expensive), the 50/1.4G so-so for an up-to-date normal prime, and the 85/1.8D perhaps good when it was released but not up to modern standards. And I am pretty sure the DxO data would confirm that impression if I processed them myself rather than relied on DxO to do the scoring.

Took a look (resolution/profiles) at 24/1.4G vs. 50/1.4G on D4. Wide open the 24/1.4G is a bit better, and at f/5.6 it's a draw. That's quite impressive though for a 24mm lens that often would have softer corners than a 50mm lens, so taking that into consideration you could say that the 24/1.4G is a higher quality lens.

As one might expect from a lens which costs $2K against one that costs $390. Nikon has never really gone for the luxury standard lens idea, their standards are economy lenses, they just come in two flavours. At the moment the f/1.8 is the better lens, and cheaper.

-- hide signature --


Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow