Maybe the magazine has to be read and judged with a little bit more care.
I read this magazine as well as others for quite a while. CF changed its testing procedure about 2 years back. At the same time they hired an engineer educated for this kind of testing. I think that the test results show a lot of consistency since then, not less than CD'I tests. What is your basis on calling "stupid" the result, that the 29-90 is slightly better than the 28-105, however both are mediocre? I do not know which of the lenses is really better, but from my own experience I can confirm that the 28-105/f3.2-4.5 is mediocre, and that the FA28-70/f4 is somewhat better but not much.
You are right in observing that CF tests are carried out at wide open and two stops down. So the FA28-80/f3,5-5,6 tested at about f4 and f8 can indeed get results similar to those of the FA28-70/f2.8 tested at f2.8 and at f5.6. However, CF does not claim that the results are comparable. In their test reports they clearly state that the results for lenses of different speeds cannot be compared directly. Also one must take into account, that for a super wide angle zoom like the FA20-35/f4 a good performance is harder to achievbe than for a zoom like the FA28-70/f4, so 70 points for the 20-35 is much more of an achievement than 69 points for the 28-70/f4. Also, a zoom with larger zooming range usually does not perform as well as a zoom with smaller zooming range. Please take these remarks into account when evaluating the following CF test results for all Pentax zooms tested:
F17-28/f3,5-4,5 Fisheye Zoom: 72 points FA20-35/f4: 70 points FA24-90/f3,5-4,5: 67 points FA28-70/f2.8: 74 points FA28-70/f4: 69 points FA28-80/f3,5-5,6: 73 points FA28-90/f3,5-5,6: 69 points FA28-105/f3,2-4,5: 66 points FA28-105/f4-5.6: 73 points FA28-200/f3,8-5,6: 64 points FA80-200/f2,8: 76 points FA80-320/f4,5-5.6: 71 points FA100-300/f4,7-5,8: 73 points.
Arnold
Sylwester Pietrzyk schrieb:
on 10.09.03 17:32, Boris Liberman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pentax SMC-FA 3,5-5.6/28-90mm, (130 Euros) 28/50/90mm: 68/75/65 pts, averag 69 pts.
Pentax SMC-FA 3,2-4,5/28-105mm, (300 Euros)
28/70/105mm: 66/66/65 pts, average 66 pts.
Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems like the first of the two is a kit zoom lens, which can be bought in States for less than $100. The second one is at least one class higher and can be bought in States for $200 (Adorama). So how come the prices? How come the ratings?
Or I am missing something very basic here...
Taht's just another proof how stupid some tests could be... I just remember, that in CF tests, older "kit" lens - FA 28-80/3.5-5.6 was better than not only FA 28-70/4 AL, but even it proved to be better than FA* 28-70/2.8... I haven't seen more stupid results than in this magazine. If you want to see antoher test of these two particulat lenses (28-105 and 28-90) go to www.popphoto.com - they just make prints and then visual inspection - results are at tables at different enlargements and apertures (hint: 28-105 is better).
