[luftfluss]

I know how to fudge my results using DxO as much as anyone, so your point is countered, now what?

What did I "fudge"? Are you accusing me of doctoring the graphic I posted? I just went to the DXO page, picked the 2 lenses you had pointed out, and ensured the same camera was used for testing.

[normhead]

What did I "fudge"? Are you accusing me of doctoring the graphic I posted? I just went to the DXO page, picked the 2 lenses you had pointed out, and ensured the same camera was used for testing.

And to counter this I went to DxO and picked a faster zoom, because I know from research, with different lenses on the same system, DxO scores, the fastest lens better. All I had to do to show a different result was use a zoom that is faster than the prime you picked. You compared a faster prime to a slower zoom, so of course you showed primes are better than zooms. I went to a zoom that was faster than your prime and showed zooms are better than primes. If you want to counter again, just go to the Sigma 35 1.4 and using DxO you can once again assert primes a better than zooms. The problem is that the way DxO scores are compiled, that is the result you get. If you are trying to find our which lens will give you the best resolution and IQ, DxO doesn't tell you that. It tells you which lens will give you the best result, if you shoot in your mom's basement.

So no not doctoring the graphic, but using a graphic that doesn't mean what you claim it means. The numbers I quoted from Photozone if you read the text, you'll realize, the same camera was used for testing as well.

But if I wanted to show zooms were better than primes , I would compare a DA 35 2.4 to a Sigma 18-35 1.8. And DxO would tell you the 18-35 was better. Even though at ƒ8 on both cameras, the 35 2.4 might be better. DxO is pretty much worthless for this type of comparison.

[luftfluss]

And to counter this I went to DxO and picked a faster zoom, because I know from research, with different lenses on the same system, DxO scores, the fastest lens better. All I had to do to show a different result was use a zoom that is faster than the prime you picked. You compared a faster prime to a slower zoom, so of course you showed primes are better than zooms. I went to a zoom that was faster than your prime and showed zooms are better than primes. If you want to counter again, just go to the Sigma 35 1.4 and using DxO you can once again assert primes a better than zooms. The problem is that the way DxO scores are compiled, that is the result you get. If you are trying to find our which lens will give you the best resolution and IQ, DxO doesn't tell you that. It tells you which lens will give you the best result, if you shoot in your mom's basement.

So no not doctoring the graphic, but using a graphic that doesn't mean what you claim it means. The numbers I quoted from Photozone if you read the text, you'll realize, the same camera was used for testing as well.

But if I wanted to show zooms were better than primes , I would compare a DA 35 2.4 to a Sigma 18-35 1.8. And DxO would tell you the 18-35 was better. Even though at ƒ8 on both cameras, the 35 2.4 might be better. DxO is pretty much worthless for this type of comparison.

I picked the 2 lenses that you initially chose, so if you don't like that choice, point your finger at yourself.

DxO does give you a resolution score. If you can't figure out how to read it, perhaps you should get out of your... basement more often

Anyway, I'm done with this thread, as this discussion is not helpful to the OP .

[normhead]

If you can't figure out how to read it, perhaps you should get out of your... basement more often

I don't think we've established here which one of us is misreading the data. You must be new at this.

All you've shown by doing what you did was that one site, shows one lens better, the other site shows the other one better, if you can't understand how the data is compiled, you'll never understand this. Using their own system of compiling and rating data they are both right... but if you're looking for absolute detail, only Photozone numbers represent that.

[kh1234567890]

I need something wide which is close to 35 2.4 in terms of sharpness. On photozone.de I considered a 15mm ltd but it seems that 16-45 is shaper on wide end according to charts. Weird. Prime is not must have, but i want lens wich is sharper then 16-45 and with great AF. Any ideas ?

Don't take any notice of charts on any of the 'test' sites. Look at actual photos on Flickr etc. instead. Or even on this forum.

As someone else had suggested, the DA21 is pretty sharp even wide open, AF is very fast and reliable and is the lens is much more versatile than the DA15.

[SMeK]

Thank you all. I think it will be DA 21.