Originally posted by FantasticMrFox
[B]My point stands, the reviews in the lens data base are on average much more positive than independent third party reviews, and thus in my eyes not very objective.
@Carey Rose:
The DPR posts have been pretty fair and accurate recently. It is kind of their reviewer to JOIN the Forum (New Member) and post in one of our threads, so we can understand the process he used (and know he understands the shortcomings). It's particularly refreshing that one of our members reached out to him to explain a fine detail of the Pentax files and jpeg conversions - and the writer actually reprocessed the images and re-posted them. That is, I think, unprecedented. In all my time on these fora . . . .
The over-rating in the Review database has been discussed often over the years, from many perspectives. The way to use the ratings is to accept the standard here is different than an independent database, then compare the rating of a reference lens that you own yourself to the ratings of the other lenses.
The absolute rating number doesn't matter - it is just an index. What matters is the relative rating of each lens, when compared to the others. So an M28/2 at 9.33 is clearly preferred over an M28/2.8 at 8.22. And a K28/2 at 9.69 is preferred to the M28/2 at 9.33. And a K28/3.5 at 9.31 is about equivalent to the M28/2 at 9.33. I own all four of those lenses. The
relative ratings accurately describe the
relative attractiveness of these 4 28's. The absolute numbers don't really matter.
Secondly, we all know in a non-scientific, open, subjective rating system, one poster with a curly hair in his . . . Is perfectly free to rate a lens 1 or 2, bringing down the average number. As a matter of habit I throw out the highest and lowest rating and calculate my own average number.
Thirdly, the number itself doesn't matter one whit. What matters is the comments the poster makes, and any sample images the poster uploads.
I hope these observations ease your tension and make your evening a bit more pleasant.