canoli
03-20-2010, 07:17 PM
Unless I'm reading these sites wrong, there is a major difference in the MTF50 results given for the same lens - in this case the 70-200 2.8 IS.
Look at f/2.8 at 200mm:
dpreview shows about 900, and photozone has it close to 1600. They're both in LP/PH, the only difference is DP used a 40D and photozone used a 350D.
I understand DP generally favors Nikon, but the discrepancy shown here is not explained by that. Unless I'm reading the charts incorrectly...?
Is there a reasonable explanation for this? I'd like to be able to trust some of these other sites, not just Bryan's. But if the results vary this much...
Here's the links:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/widget/Fullscreen.ashx ("http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/widget/Fullscreen.ashx)
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/199-canon-ef-70-200mm-f28-usm-l-is-test-report--review?start=1 ("http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/199-canon-ef-70-200mm-f28-usm-l-is-test-report--review?start=1)
Look at f/2.8 at 200mm:
dpreview shows about 900, and photozone has it close to 1600. They're both in LP/PH, the only difference is DP used a 40D and photozone used a 350D.
I understand DP generally favors Nikon, but the discrepancy shown here is not explained by that. Unless I'm reading the charts incorrectly...?
Is there a reasonable explanation for this? I'd like to be able to trust some of these other sites, not just Bryan's. But if the results vary this much...
Here's the links:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/widget/Fullscreen.ashx ("http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/widget/Fullscreen.ashx)
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/199-canon-ef-70-200mm-f28-usm-l-is-test-report--review?start=1 ("http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/199-canon-ef-70-200mm-f28-usm-l-is-test-report--review?start=1)