Originally posted by patk they can use whatever methodology they choose. but the object is to demonstrate that existing reviews of one (and preferably several) of the lenses in the database have produced an erroneous conclusion, thus lending substantiation to the claim that the current reviews are borderline worthless.
otherwise i don't see the reason for the fuss. and i certainly don't see any basis for jettisoning the contribution those who have participated in writing reviews have made thus far, which is really where this is leading.
I was having a little fun with the comment. the perception I have is that many people like to complain about the reviews but not as many actually contribute for one reason or another.
It really is a case of put up or shut up.
In going back through the posts, in this thread, there are several underlying issues raised, many valid, many not.
-
price changes over time and with many used K mounts is going up, so the average price is a little misleading, but I think price is still relevant to the impression of quality
-
rating is highly variable, depending on reviewer and context of the review
- descriptions are not consistent. Many people do not describe the lens in a consistent manner
-
sample/test shots some people want sample shots, but others insist they must be either of subjects they (the reader) like, or museum/art gallery quality to make the review worthwhile and credible
- everything is rated 8 or higher. True, but if all people want is gallery/museum quality shots this would be the case also.
- reviewers should also be rated
- some people want a professional review database seperate from the existing one.
Also in reading the posts, I almost get the impression that many people here are confusing the forum threads where someone gets his / her new toy and goes out to take shots with it, forum threads are not reviews,
It should also be pointed out that there is a proposal to add a lens photo database, where posters can put photos taken with a specific lens, or put links to existing posts where they have uploaded images for review. The image database would be considerably different than the review database.
The bottom line is that the existing database is worthwhile, providing people understand why and how it was created. In many instances the lenses reviewed are not in production and the last professional review, if any was made, was possible 40-50 years ago and not relevant.
I do not know how others review lenses, but when I review a lens, (I have done about 8 of my 32 lenses) I put the characteristics I can determine, F-Stops, focus rotation overall impression, any flaws mechanically optically, and how it meters and behaves on my camera. Basically the user detectable performance of the lens. I generally do not post photos taken, that is for the forum not the database. I will describe issues such as vignetting, CA (Lateral or longitudinal) and recommend whether it should be bought or not, or cautions when purchasing.