About the new lens reviews ...
I may be wrong, but AFAIK they set the lens and the target at a distance such as the image of the target fills the frame, in every case. So, magnification (which is a parameter which I see rarely used, if ever) is the same for all.
Actually that's one of the first things that goes into a lens design. And it used to be reported in older tests -- it's always reported in technical data.
That is the same way the user sets up the camera: so that the scene fills the frame.
That would be strange then, because different lenses have different intended magnifications. Wideangles are designed for low ratios, telephotos usually for significantly higher ones. But even here there's a range, with portrait lenses optimized for higher magnifications than wildlife superteles. At the extreme end, astronomical telescopes are optimized for extremely low magnifications but are not so good at higher.
Filling the scene doesn't mean much if you don't know how far away it is.
In the big picture this is not a big deal, anymore than whether a lens resolves 917 whatevers per whatnot or has a t-stop of 3.1 instead of 2.8 or what contrast ratio we use in the MTF. But if you're going to make a big effort to do a test, it would be nice to know the test conditions.
- Canon EOS M58.8%
- Panasonic G85/G803.3%
- Panasonic FZ2500/FZ20001.9%
- Panasonic LX10/LX151.2%
- Panasonic GH5 development3.6%
- Sony a99 II15.9%
- Nikon KeyMission 170 and 801.0%
- Fujifilm GFX 50S development28.3%
- Olympus E-M1 II development18.7%
- Olympus E-PL80.1%
- Olympus 25mm F1.2 Pro1.5%
- Olympus 12-100mm F4 IS Pro1.9%
- Olympus 30mm F3.5 Macro0.1%
- Sigma 85mm F1.4 Art3.6%
- Sigma 12-24mm F4 Art2.6%
- Sigma 500mm F4 DG OS HSM Sport2.4%
- YI M12.2%
- GoPro Hero50.8%
- GoPro Karma drone2.2%