Originally posted by Spodeworld I know the reviews are subjective, but any thoughts as to why the SMC version of the 40 2.8 has a much higher rating than the HD one?
I've a couple of additional possible thoughts about this:
- The HD review sample size is yet quite small vs the SMC version reviews (5 vs 133). It may take some time to build up the sample size, allowing for everyone to upgrade or buy new. Of the five HD reviews, the results are 2-10's, 1-9, 1-8 and 1-6. The "8" reviewer cited a possible mechanical issue and the "6" reviewer seemed miffed that the HD version was very costly for the perceived little additional benefit. They both did not recommend this lens. My guess is that this pace of HD review results will not persist and the average will approach that of the SMC version.
- The original SMC 40 lens review scores might have benefitted from the initial wow moment from new owners. The 40 might have been the initial limited lens for many (as it was for me) and the initial impression, without users experiencing the wonders of other great lenses yet, might have astonished many owners into providing a "10" score.