I did a few lens tests two years ago; I was (somewhat) obsessed with lens performance then.forbytes said:I do agree that such test are not fun. Can learn from possible pitfall and future test can be improved and extended for other people like Nikon or Canon or etc.![]()
An example: http://www.geocities.com/nhyone/LensTest100/Main.html (needs Javascript; poorly scripted)
Took me 20 minutes or so to set up the test target, the tripod, aligning the camera (and it was still tilted) and so on. With zoom lenses, you need to make sure the composition still works at both ends.
I laid out all the lenses properly beforehand to simplify matters.
Focusing was a pain. Took a minute or two. And no zooming in before focusing -- most zoom lenses are actually varifocal.
The actual shooting was fast; 3 to 5 seconds per shot (using MLU). I wrote down all the settings I wanted to test beforehand to avoid confusion.
Have to be careful not to touch or move the tripod and camera. Or it's game over! It's good to practise changing lens first.
I did the tests with the intention to see the difference in sharpness, but I learnt that,
- I should have listened to advice to use B&W film and not Velvia, despite being the sharpest slide film.
- Scanning at 2820 dpi means no sharpness test (2820 dpi is 55.5 lpmm)
- Saw difference in light falloff, color rendition, contrast and distortion -- didn't expect these to show up well
On the plus side, I know for sure the tradeoffs wide open, and when the quality becomes acceptable.