Originally posted by Trickortreat But that is how it needs to be tested. Testing a lens without a camera means a diddly squat.
Only by testing the complete system, camera+lens one can get the whole picture (photo)
It means more than diddly squat. It just isn’t the whole story. Such tests compare one lens to another in controlled, identical conditions and seeking comparative information for specific, tested qualities.
Originally posted by Trickortreat Exactly. Real world experience. That is the only thing worth to the end user. Lab results can be indicative but also deceptive.
Testing individual lenses on individual cameras
adds real world information to the objective test data so users can make truly informed compare and contrast decisions. Both have value.
Fairly comparing images shot on a particular camera requires some reasonable controls, such as constant exposure value, focus accuracy, scene and lighting consistency and sensor format, development software and software settings. Otherwise a compare and contrast is nothing more than subjective preference rating.
So the DFA*50/1.4 can and should be bench tested against all manner of top normals, including the Tokina Opera, and those results should be published and respected. Real world images should also be compared, understanding that the final image comparison is a matter of comment, taste and opinion