Another update of this list ... some interesting changes here.
1. Sigma 16mm f/1.4 at number 5 on the list, with the highest average rating (B+H and Amazon) for any E/FE lens with at least 50 ratings.
2. The cheap 7artisans 25mm f/1.8 lens at number 26, easily the highest placing for a super-cheap lens.
ooooooooooooooooo
I sometimes put up a list of all E/FE lenses with various stats. You can find the latest list here.
That list is ordered in terms of focal length, Just for something different, below is a list of FE lenses, ordered by their ratings (out of 5) on B+H and Amazon. I've updated a lot of the ratings recently.
The list is ordered in terms of a bayesian average, which is how a lot of websites rank things (e.g. IMDB top 250 films and boardgamegeek ). It works such that a lens with a single rating of 5 does not shoot to the top. Instead, it finds the balance between having a high rating and a good number of ratings. It is a reasonable (but far from perfect) estimate of where a rating will eventually settle. Lenses with few ratings will tend to the middle of the list (there is not enough information), and tend to move higher (or lower) as the number of ratings increase.
The number in parentheses is just the number of ratings from each website. I've split the list into three 'pictures' because one long picture is difficult to see on the screen.
This is a ranking of the best rated lenses on two websites. It is NOT necessarily a list of the ranking of the best lenses. You can probably come up with lots of reasons why the B+H and Amazon ratings are somehow flawed - I can too (e.g. low rating because of Amazon delivery service etc etc etc). Don't get too hung up that your BFF lens is ranked only at number 11 or whatever rather than number 1 where it really deserved to be. Its just a list for general interest. The ranking for lenses with very few ratings (e.g. 100mm STF and the Loxia 85mm) will obviously change as more ratings come in.
That said, the rankings unsurprisingly do line up pretty well with what 'general opinion' seems to be. My rough impression of what people are basing their rating on is that it is a combination of absolute quality and value for money, probably around 60/40 or 70/30 I reckon. There is a good mix of expensive and cheaper lenses in all parts of the list. In a few cases something else is a significant factor - the obvious one being the GM 85mm f/1.4, which got a lot of low ratings because of noisy AF.
--
https://www.facebook.com/John-Clark-Photography-1035965476487072/
1. Sigma 16mm f/1.4 at number 5 on the list, with the highest average rating (B+H and Amazon) for any E/FE lens with at least 50 ratings.
2. The cheap 7artisans 25mm f/1.8 lens at number 26, easily the highest placing for a super-cheap lens.
ooooooooooooooooo
I sometimes put up a list of all E/FE lenses with various stats. You can find the latest list here.
That list is ordered in terms of focal length, Just for something different, below is a list of FE lenses, ordered by their ratings (out of 5) on B+H and Amazon. I've updated a lot of the ratings recently.
The list is ordered in terms of a bayesian average, which is how a lot of websites rank things (e.g. IMDB top 250 films and boardgamegeek ). It works such that a lens with a single rating of 5 does not shoot to the top. Instead, it finds the balance between having a high rating and a good number of ratings. It is a reasonable (but far from perfect) estimate of where a rating will eventually settle. Lenses with few ratings will tend to the middle of the list (there is not enough information), and tend to move higher (or lower) as the number of ratings increase.
The number in parentheses is just the number of ratings from each website. I've split the list into three 'pictures' because one long picture is difficult to see on the screen.
This is a ranking of the best rated lenses on two websites. It is NOT necessarily a list of the ranking of the best lenses. You can probably come up with lots of reasons why the B+H and Amazon ratings are somehow flawed - I can too (e.g. low rating because of Amazon delivery service etc etc etc). Don't get too hung up that your BFF lens is ranked only at number 11 or whatever rather than number 1 where it really deserved to be. Its just a list for general interest. The ranking for lenses with very few ratings (e.g. 100mm STF and the Loxia 85mm) will obviously change as more ratings come in.
That said, the rankings unsurprisingly do line up pretty well with what 'general opinion' seems to be. My rough impression of what people are basing their rating on is that it is a combination of absolute quality and value for money, probably around 60/40 or 70/30 I reckon. There is a good mix of expensive and cheaper lenses in all parts of the list. In a few cases something else is a significant factor - the obvious one being the GM 85mm f/1.4, which got a lot of low ratings because of noisy AF.
--
https://www.facebook.com/John-Clark-Photography-1035965476487072/
Last edited: