Anyone notice DPreview's lens review results

SLC Flyfishing · 02-28-2008, 10:19 AM

DPreview, the site which has a reputation among us Pentaxians for being more than slightly biased in the Canikon Direction has a lens review section that's getting up and going.

Well I noticed that so far they have reviewed Canon Pentax and Nikon's kit 18-55 mm lenses and guess which one comes out on top? It's the Pentax!

Here are the average scores (out of 10)

Pentax 7.6
Nikon 7.3
Canon 7.2

And the other lenses tested so far don't line up so well so I won't compare them. But the Canon 17-85 IS USM gets a 'just' recommended with an average score of 7.7, while the Pentax 16-45 gets a recommended with an average score of 7.6 (perhaps this is because the Canon receives a slightly lower score in the only area that really matters (image quality) with a 7.5 compared to the Pentax's 8) Nikon's 18-200 which isn't even in the same class of lenses gets a 7.8 average but suffers in image quality with only a 7 score!

I found this to be interesting! Finally a bit of validation to something I've suspected for quite some time. Can't wait to see what they find when they test the DA* 50-135 compared to similar Canon and Nikon lenses since this is likely the next lens on my list for purchase.

SLC

Jasvox · 03-03-2008, 12:29 PM

Just the fact that Canon's kit lens scored above 7 is reason to for me to think this review is worthless.

I agree, the Pentax lens is superior, but come on, only by a few tenths of a point??

wank wank.

Jas

raz · 03-03-2008, 04:04 PM

Jasvox what do you mean ?

The kit lens tested by dpreview for the canon, is the NEW canon kit lens, the one stabilized, which is way better than the old lenses they used before.

Jasvox · 03-03-2008, 11:50 PM

then I stand corrected!

Jas

mattdm · 03-04-2008, 07:54 PM

One thing I find kind of funny i that they seem to give extra "value" score to lenses with built-in image stabilization. That's reasonable enough — but of course significantly diminishes the value of the numbers as a comparison metric between systems.

Buddha Jones · 03-04-2008, 08:40 PM

Lens tests should be on IQ, not gimmicky features. The Pentax should be given the same nod as the bodies that they go onto are SR enabled.

Geekybiker · 03-05-2008, 03:28 PM

Originally posted by mattdm

One thing I find kind of funny i that they seem to give extra "value" score to lenses with built-in image stabilization. That's reasonable enough — but of course significantly diminishes the value of the numbers as a comparison metric between systems.

Heh. They should score all k mount lenses as having IS then.

raz-0 · 03-05-2008, 03:54 PM

Originally posted by Buddha Jones

Lens tests should be on IQ, not gimmicky features. The Pentax should be given the same nod as the bodies that they go onto are SR enabled.

By and large, lenses should probably be graded on image quality, build quality, range/versatility, and price. As largely those are the things one has to include in choosing what compromises will be made in building your kit.

However, stabilization and availability are critical x-factors in the value of a lens. Pentax gets an automatic bonus on one, and generally suffers with regards to the other.

Most of the griping is solved by simply payign attention to the important bits. It doesn't seem that what you need to make a good choice is omitted from the review, so it isn't a particularly bad review.

Tom M · 03-05-2008, 04:43 PM

What a bunch of ******s.. Giving points for IS? Good god! IS is a 'system feature'... They should measure optics and ergos and build quality, period!

mattdm · 03-06-2008, 05:50 AM

Originally posted by Tom M

What a bunch of ******s.. Giving points for IS? Good god! IS is a 'system feature'... They should measure optics and ergos and build quality, period!

From the point of view of someone comparing lenses within their system, having IS certainly plays a very big role in determining a lens's value. I disagree with the idea that they should disregard it.

It makes the reviews less useful for cross-system chest-beating, but is that really their point anyway?

Tom M · 03-06-2008, 07:12 AM

Originally posted by mattdm

From the point of view of someone comparing lenses within their system, having IS certainly plays a very big role in determining a lens's value. I disagree with the idea that they should disregard it.

It makes the reviews less useful for cross-system chest-beating, but is that really their point anyway?

I'm looking at it like this..

Bench test results? Image Stabilization is not needed.

I didn't see where they said they took a camera and lens jogging to check the IS performance.

mattdm · 03-06-2008, 07:20 AM

They're not factoring IS into the image quality results, just (apparently) into Value, which influences the overall score. I'm having a hard time being offended by that, because for systems without IS in the body, IS in the lens does factor into the value proposition of the lens.

Tom M · 03-06-2008, 02:19 PM

Originally posted by mattdm

They're not factoring IS into the image quality results, just (apparently) into Value, which influences the overall score. I'm having a hard time being offended by that, because for systems without IS in the body, IS in the lens does factor into the value proposition of the lens.

Maybe..

Though, would having a rope and pulley system on your car to manually operate the windshield wipers add value to the car when other cars use an electric motor and a switch to accomplish the same thing?

Maybe I'm putting too much emphasis on the fact that lens based IS is in of itself a somewhat barbaric and poor implementation at solving a problem. Clearly sensor or simply camera-based systems are better.

Face it, lens-based IS is a hold-over from film days. They probably tried but, they couldn't shake the film to get a stabilized image. With sensors, it's obviously the only way to do it and any company not doing it that way, is just being stupid. Period.

02-28-2008, 10:19 AM	#1
SLC Flyfishing Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Salt Lake City, Utah Photos: Gallery Posts: 119	Anyone notice DPreview's lens review results DPreview, the site which has a reputation among us Pentaxians for being more than slightly biased in the Canikon Direction has a lens review section that's getting up and going. Well I noticed that so far they have reviewed Canon Pentax and Nikon's kit 18-55 mm lenses and guess which one comes out on top? It's the Pentax! Here are the average scores (out of 10) Pentax 7.6 Nikon 7.3 Canon 7.2 And the other lenses tested so far don't line up so well so I won't compare them. But the Canon 17-85 IS USM gets a 'just' recommended with an average score of 7.7, while the Pentax 16-45 gets a recommended with an average score of 7.6 (perhaps this is because the Canon receives a slightly lower score in the only area that really matters (image quality) with a 7.5 compared to the Pentax's 8) Nikon's 18-200 which isn't even in the same class of lenses gets a 7.8 average but suffers in image quality with only a 7 score! I found this to be interesting! Finally a bit of validation to something I've suspected for quite some time. Can't wait to see what they find when they test the DA* 50-135 compared to similar Canon and Nikon lenses since this is likely the next lens on my list for purchase. SLC

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Tamron 10-24mm lens review in dpreview	gawan	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	08-02-2009 09:16 AM
Pentax DA* 55mm F1.4 lens review in dpreview.com	gawan	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	31	08-01-2009 12:57 PM
Sigma 10-20mm lens review in dpreview.com	gawan	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	26	05-29-2009 12:08 PM
kit lens review at dpreview	truonganh	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	1	02-21-2008 09:27 PM
DPreview launches lens review section - starts with Pentax (and some other misc brand	mattdm	Pentax News and Rumors	14	01-30-2008 04:48 AM

03-03-2008, 12:29 PM	#2
Jasvox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 3,107	Just the fact that Canon's kit lens scored above 7 is reason to for me to think this review is worthless. I agree, the Pentax lens is superior, but come on, only by a few tenths of a point?? wank wank. Jas

03-03-2008, 04:04 PM	#3
raz Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Timisoara, Romania Posts: 248	Jasvox what do you mean ? The kit lens tested by dpreview for the canon, is the NEW canon kit lens, the one stabilized, which is way better than the old lenses they used before.

03-03-2008, 11:50 PM	#4
Jasvox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 3,107	then I stand corrected! Jas

03-04-2008, 07:54 PM	#5
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	One thing I find kind of funny i that they seem to give extra "value" score to lenses with built-in image stabilization. That's reasonable enough — but of course significantly diminishes the value of the numbers as a comparison metric between systems.

03-04-2008, 08:40 PM	#6
Buddha Jones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,587	Lens tests should be on IQ, not gimmicky features. The Pentax should be given the same nod as the bodies that they go onto are SR enabled.

03-05-2008, 03:28 PM	#7
Geekybiker Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Chicagoland Posts: 337	Originally posted by mattdm One thing I find kind of funny i that they seem to give extra "value" score to lenses with built-in image stabilization. That's reasonable enough — but of course significantly diminishes the value of the numbers as a comparison metric between systems. Heh. They should score all k mount lenses as having IS then.

03-05-2008, 03:54 PM	#8
raz-0 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Central NJ Posts: 470	Originally posted by Buddha Jones Lens tests should be on IQ, not gimmicky features. The Pentax should be given the same nod as the bodies that they go onto are SR enabled. By and large, lenses should probably be graded on image quality, build quality, range/versatility, and price. As largely those are the things one has to include in choosing what compromises will be made in building your kit. However, stabilization and availability are critical x-factors in the value of a lens. Pentax gets an automatic bonus on one, and generally suffers with regards to the other. Most of the griping is solved by simply payign attention to the important bits. It doesn't seem that what you need to make a good choice is omitted from the review, so it isn't a particularly bad review.

03-05-2008, 04:43 PM	#9
Tom M Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Lincoln Park, NJ Photos: Gallery Posts: 780	What a bunch of ******s.. Giving points for IS? Good god! IS is a 'system feature'... They should measure optics and ergos and build quality, period!

03-06-2008, 05:50 AM	#10
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	Originally posted by Tom M What a bunch of *****s.. Giving points for IS? Good god! IS is a 'system feature'... They should measure optics and ergos and build quality, period! From the point of view of someone comparing lenses within their system, having IS certainly plays a very big role in determining a lens's value. I disagree with the idea that they should disregard it. It makes the reviews less useful for cross-system chest-beating, but is that really* their point anyway?

03-06-2008, 07:12 AM	#11
Tom M Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Lincoln Park, NJ Photos: Gallery Posts: 780	Originally posted by mattdm From the point of view of someone comparing lenses within their system, having IS certainly plays a very big role in determining a lens's value. I disagree with the idea that they should disregard it. It makes the reviews less useful for cross-system chest-beating, but is that really their point anyway? I'm looking at it like this.. Bench test results? Image Stabilization is not needed. I didn't see where they said they took a camera and lens jogging to check the IS performance.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-06-2008, 07:20 AM	#12
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	They're not factoring IS into the image quality results, just (apparently) into Value, which influences the overall score. I'm having a hard time being offended by that, because for systems without IS in the body, IS in the lens does factor into the value proposition of the lens.

03-06-2008, 02:19 PM	#13
Tom M Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Lincoln Park, NJ Photos: Gallery Posts: 780	Originally posted by mattdm They're not factoring IS into the image quality results, just (apparently) into Value, which influences the overall score. I'm having a hard time being offended by that, because for systems without IS in the body, IS in the lens does factor into the value proposition of the lens. Maybe.. Though, would having a rope and pulley system on your car to manually operate the windshield wipers add value to the car when other cars use an electric motor and a switch to accomplish the same thing? Maybe I'm putting too much emphasis on the fact that lens based IS is in of itself a somewhat barbaric and poor implementation at solving a problem. Clearly sensor or simply camera-based systems are better. Face it, lens-based IS is a hold-over from film days. They probably tried but, they couldn't shake the film to get a stabilized image. With sensors, it's obviously the only way to do it and any company not doing it that way, is just being stupid. Period.