ttuplai kirjoitti:
Dustinin tubetus tai bloggaaminen on kyllä melkoisen kaukana testaamisesta - viihteenä menee toki. Lensrentals on jo paljon likempänä, mut hyö pysyvätkin numeroissa ja graafeissa sen enempää hifistelemättä. Eli jos ko. kaveri edustaa sinulle testaamista niin olemme kauempana kuin uskotkaan eli mittaamisen perusajatus on toistettavuus.
Lähes kaikki vertailut ja testit on viihdettä, poislukien Lens rentals, jossa testataan kunnon välineillä aina isompi määrä yksilöitä. Totuus on se, että monesti kaikki lehtien ja sivustojen vertailut on tehty jollakin tietyllä objektiiviyksilöllä, joka jo sinänsä on huono lähtökohta mihinkään luotettavaan lopputulokseen. Se vertailulasi kun voi olla viallinen. Usein onkin. Ja jos ei ole, niin se itse ostamasi on.
Eli nämä ns artikkelit ja videot on aina tekijänsä subjektiivinen näkemys aiheesta. Ja usein värittynyt.
Tässä taas yksi lisää, mutta tässä on jopa lista siitä mistä mikrokontrastia löytyy.
Fuji mainittu. Zeiss mainittu.
__________________________________________________________________
https://yannickkhong.com/blog/2016/2/8/ ... -the-world" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
WHERE TO FIND IT?
Micro-contrast is a premium attribute in some brands while being spread more evenly on others.
Canon has two line of lenses clearly directed at two drastically different users: L (enthusiast and professional users) and non-L (occasional and casual users). While some non-L or third party lenses might score higher than L lenses on test charts, Canon L lenses are the better Canon lenses with micro-contrast and will have superior rendition to the non-L. The price gap between a Non-L and a L lens is close to double price. Canon is also starting to release replacement version to their original L primes lenses, many of which lose their micro-contrast in favour of resolution.
Nikkor lenses all have okay to excellent micro-contrast as this attribute is spread more evenly across the entire optical library, but usually cost a little more than Canon’s affordable non-L lenses depending on wether it is from the Ai/Ai-S, AF-D or AF-S line (many AF-S G prime lenses have inferior micro-contrast to their older AF-D line)
Voigtlander SL lenses have amazing micro-contrast (sometimes at the cost of sharpness) and cost just a little more than Nikkor lenses.
Many Zeiss ZF/ZE Classic lenses have world leading micro-contrast and are perhaps the most premium lenses for dSLRs. The Zeiss OTUS and Milvus lenses have reduced micro-contrast in favor of resolution.
Sigma ART lenses do not have micro-contrast at all.
Sony E-mount lenses lineups are similar to the Canon model. Non-L lenses are replaced by G and non-G lenses. L lenses are replaced by premium Sony lenses with Zeiss design and coating. Lately their goals are to reduce this attribute in favour of resolution in the G-Master lenses.
Fuji XF lenses all have good to great micro-contrast like Nikkor lenses but they require the use of Iridient Developer (Mac OS only) to reveal their true nature.
M43 lenses have awful to very good micro-contrast but it is harder to identify which ones since they are still figuring out ways to exploit that attribute at the sensor-level (they might have reached solution in the GX8).
__________________________________________________________________
Tuo on siis vain mielipide. Kaikki mikä lukee netissä, ei ole ehdottoman totta. Mutta se riita mikä tuosta listasta alkaa, on ihan todellinen kärhämä.