Originally Posted by gkopeliadis 
I think that the test shots posted here for lens evaluation are totaly useless they are 100% size / crops.
All lens are the same (more or less) on a 1024X768 photograph, let alone smaller.
Please note that I'm writing about lens evaluation, not photographer
What is your opinion on that?
I think you are making too general a statement about "tests"
While I agree that it is virtually impossible to post photos that demonstrate absolute resolution of a lens and absolute IQ, there are a wide range of test photos that can show other aspects of lens performance that are not dependant on 100% pixle resolution, specifically but not limited to
- flair
- contrast (or lack of)
- focusing errors and flat field performance
- depth of feild and bokeh
- vignetting
- barrel and pincushion distortion
- exposure consistancy as a function of F-Stop
- chromatic aberrations and purple fringing
Additionally while not conclusive, resized photos that really "pop" right out of the camera with no PP still give an impression of image quality even though not down to the pixel level.
lets accept "test photos" for what they are. But just as an aside, I use a 22 inch monitor, in 1920 x 1200 mode. This means that at a pixlel level I can see 1/4 of my K10D image. If I view someone's image on my screen and it is sharp everywhere at this level of resolution, even though it may not be an absolute measure, it is bigger than most of us will ever print and pretty damm good!