I agree with what you say as well. But I'm not a pixel peeper. If a photo looks good, it's a good photo. Paul On Jul 7, 2007, at 10:24 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
> On 08/07/07, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I agree that some lenses are more prone to fringing than others. For >> example, my A 400/5.6 exhibits fringing quite frequently in high >> contrast situations. It's even worse with the A2XS converter mounted >> -- not surprisingly. However, I've yet to encounter a serious >> fringing problem with the DA 50-200. However, I could easily >> understand that there would be sample variation with consumer grade >> zooms. I also believe that more than a handful of people like this >> lens. I've made enough money with it to pay for it ten times over. >> And no one purchased any warts. That's a lens test. > > I agree with pretty much all you say above except that the purchases > equate to a lens test. Klaus's site provides blunt technical appraisal > of each lenses performance as presented (in some instances he has > tested two lenses in others he has retested after a fault has been > identified). It provides nothing more to the photographer and should > have little to no bearing on the sale potential of any image. The > tests results may have some bearing on lens choices made by > prospective buyers or some owners but that's a matter for the lens > manufacturers to resolve. > > -- > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://picasaweb.google.com/distudio/PESO > http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
