<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>reference &#8211; YLovePhoto</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.ylovephoto.com/en/tag/reference/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.ylovephoto.com/en</link>
	<description>Intrigued by photography</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Dec 2010 17:26:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>Web sites for lens reviews</title>
		<link>https://www.ylovephoto.com/en/2008/11/26/web-sites-for-lens-reviews/</link>
					<comments>https://www.ylovephoto.com/en/2008/11/26/web-sites-for-lens-reviews/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Yves Roumazeilles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 10:02:38 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Canon accessories & lenses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nikon accessories & lenses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Olympus accessories & lenses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Panasonic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentax accessories & lenses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Samsung]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sigma accessories & lenses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sony accessories & lenses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tamron]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tokina]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reference]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[test]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://ylovephoto.com/en/?p=520</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[It is often difficult to group lens reviews in order to compare/evaluate a little more than their mere physical characteristics (focal length, aperture/diaphragm, or even number of individual lenses). But how would you evaluate/review optical quality? When I see the really impressive differences between two lenses, I would be prepared to judge from their price, [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<figure id="attachment_528" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-528" style="width: 300px" class="wp-caption alignleft"><a href="https://ylovephoto.com/en/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/canon_lenses.jpg"><img decoding="async" src="https://ylovephoto.com/en/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/canon_lenses-300x151.jpg" alt="Canon lenses" title="canon_lenses" width="300" height="151" class="size-medium wp-image-528" /></a><figcaption id="caption-attachment-528" class="wp-caption-text">Canon lenses, which one is best?</figcaption></figure>
<p><img decoding="async" src="https://www.ylovephoto.com/images/v3/square125_lens_reviews.gif" alt="Photo lens reviews" align="right">It is often difficult to group lens reviews in order to compare/evaluate a little more than their mere physical characteristics (focal length, aperture/diaphragm, or even number of individual lenses). But how would you evaluate/review optical quality? When I see the really impressive differences between two lenses, I would be prepared to judge from their price, but a cheap wide-angle lens is not always worse than a slightly more expensive one (well&#8230; if the price difference is really large, it&#8217;s not only an accident and quality explains a lot).</p>
<p>So, where should we go?</p>
<p>I collected the addresses of some web sites appearing quite able to provide this kind of quality reviews/comparisons/evaluations/tests (I try to be systematic, with your help, while telling what I believe are the strengths or the weaknesses of each one).</p>
<p><center></p>
<table class="std_box">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>
<strong>Site</strong>
</td>
<td>
<strong>Canon lenses</strong>
</td>
<td>
<strong>Nikon lenses</strong>
</td>
<td>
<strong>Sony lenses</strong>
</td>
<td>
<strong>All the reviews/tests</strong>
</td>
<td>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
SLR gear
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showcat.php/cat/4">Canon lens</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showcat.php/cat/6">Nikon lens</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showcat.php/cat/81">Sony</a>, <a href="http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showcat.php/cat/41">Minolta</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showcat.php/cat/2">Lens reviews</a>
</td>
<td>
In-depth, but a lot of lenses are still not reviewed (only a mere characteristics list)
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
Photozone
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos">Canon EOS (APS-C)</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests">Nikon (APS-C)</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.photozone.de/sony-alpha-aps-c-lens-tests">Sony Alpha (APS-C)</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.photozone.de/all-tests">All reviews</a>
</td>
<td>
In-depth reviews. There are few older lenses (it would be useful on the second-hand market).
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
Fred&nbsp;Miranda
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/index.php?cat=45">Canon</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/index.php?cat=1">Nikon</a>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/">All reviews</a>
</td>
<td>
Canon, Nikon, that&#8217;s all.<br />Tests are done by the users/visitors. So, quality of the reviews is&#8230; uneven, at best.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
Dyxum
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/index.asp">Sony, Minolta</a>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
Sony, Minolta, Konica, only.<br />Tests are done by the users/visitors. So, quality of the reviews is&#8230; uneven.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
Photodo
</td>
<td colspan="4">
<a href="http://www.photodo.com/category_2.html">All lens reviews</a>
</td>
<td>
In-depth analysis, but only sorted by date
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
dpreview
</td>
<td colspan="4">
<a href="http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/">Lens reviews</a>
</td>
<td>
Not many reviews yet, but an obvious professionalism
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
PopPhoto
</td>
<td colspan="4">
<a href="http://www.popphoto.com/cameralenses/">Camera lenses</a>
</td>
<td>
Precision of the analysis stays questionable (never very far from re-writing the characteristics list from the manufacturer)
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
lightrules
</td>
<td colspan="4">
<a href="http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/lenstests">Lens reviews</a>
</td>
<td>
A bit confusing to read, but there are systematic images that you can use to make your own opinion
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
Optyczne
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://optyczne.pl/26-Test_obiektywów-Canon.html">Canon</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://optyczne.pl/77-Test_obiektywów-Nikkor.html">Nikkor</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://optyczne.pl/62-Test_obiektywów-Sony.html">Sony</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://optyczne.pl/testy_obiektywów.html">Search engine</a>
</td>
<td>
Beware, this is in Polish
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
16-9.net
</td>
<td colspan="4">
<a href="http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/">Lens reviews by date</a>
</td>
<td>
Many more comparisons than individual reviews
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
Bjørn Rørslett
</td>
<td>
&#8211;
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html">Nikon &#8216;F&#8217; Mount</a>
</td>
<td>
&#8211;
</td>
<td>
&#8211;
</td>
<td>
Purely qualitative opinions, but coming from a pro-photographer really obsessed with image quality (Nikon-only)
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
Le Monde de la Photo
</td>
<td colspan="4">
<a href="http://www.lemondedelaphoto.com/-Tests,4-.html">Tous les tests</a>
</td>
<td>
Still not many reviews, but very in-depth. In French.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
Pictchallenge
</td>
<td colspan="4">
<a href="http://www.pictchallenge-archives.net/">Actualités et tests</a>
</td>
<td>
The site is nearly impossible to browse (too confusing), but the level of details is definitely interesting for those reading a little French.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
AlphaMountWorld.com
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.alphamountworld.com/lens-reviews">Sony, Minolta</a>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
Reviews for Sony, Minolta, only. Not all lenses, though.<br />Usually no figures, but some samples images and detailed advice.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
Photo.net
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://photo.net/equipment/category/lenses">Canon</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://photo.net/equipment/category/lenses">Nikon</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://photo.net/equipment/category/lenses">Sony</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://photo.net/equipment/category/lenses">All incl. Tamron, Sigma, Pentax, Olympus, Leica, Mamiya</a>
</td>
<td>
The list is impressive, but many listed lenses only have &#8220;<em>Reader comments</em>&#8221; and no &#8220;<em>review</em>&#8220;.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
NewCameraReview
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.newcamerareview.com/sony_lens_chartid223.html">Sony, Minolta</a>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
Reviews for Sony, Minolta, only. But the tests are full of details with many sample images along with the individual tests.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
NaturePixel
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.naturepixel.com/technique.htm#objectifboitier">Essais objectifs et boîtiers</a> (in French)
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
Only Canon, a few lenses only, but clean pictures, a neat work and a very readable conclusion.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
The-Digital-Picture.com
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-Zoom-Lens-Reviews.aspx">Canon zoom lenses</a><br />
<a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-Lens-Reviews.aspx">Canon lenses</a><br />
<a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-Lens-Reviews.aspx">Canon EF-S lenses</a><br />
<a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/">All Canon and Canon-compatible equipment reviews</a>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
Only Canon, but commendable analysis.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
MomentCorporation
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.momentcorp.com/review/index.html">Lens Reviews</a> (both AF and manual focus lenses)
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
Nikon lenses (and less than 10 other lenses). A few accessories and Nikon cameras, too.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
Photography Review
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/digital-lenses/pls_4204_670crx.aspx">Canon lenses</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/digital-lenses/pls_4204_780crx.aspx">Nikon lenses</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/digital-lenses/pls_4204_830crx.aspx">Sony lenses</a>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/CAT_3787crx.aspx">All lens user reviews</a>
</td>
<td>
Those are mostly user reviews, so they lack details and precision, but they are worth reading anyway.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
Kurt Munger
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://kurtmunger.com/lens_reviews_id21.html">Sony &#038; compatible lenses</a>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
Only Sony, but the analysis is very well detailed and the advice is always precise.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
LensPlay reviews (Bob Atkins)
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.lensplay.com/lenses/lens_query.php">Canon Database</a>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
Only for Canon, the web site is a little hard to use.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
SUBJECTIVE Lens Evaluations (Mostly Nikkors), by David Ruether
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.donferrario.com/ruether/slemn.html">Nikkor subjective evaluations</a>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
Only for Nikon, terse on details.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
Pentax Forums lens review database
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/">All Pentax lenses ever produced</a>
</td>
<td>
Pentax, only Pentax, all Pentax.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
Bojidar Dimitrov&#8217;s Pentax K-Mount Page
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>
<a href="http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/resolution.html">Measured resolution on Pentax lenses</a>
</td>
<td>
Pentax: Including the synthesis of measurement work done by Yoshihiko Takinami and Frederick Wasti, two renowned analysts from the Pentax world.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
fotopolis
</td>
<td colspan=4>
<a href="http://www.fotopolis.pl/index.php?gora=3&#038;lewa=2">Lens tests</a>, in publication order
</td>
<td>
Tests <strong>in Polish</strong>. Many of them, but finding the lens you&#8217;re interested into is not always easy, for lack of organized presentation.
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p></center></p>
<p>From here, I invite you to an orgy of lens reviews, lens tests, lens comparisons, lens evaluations. And remember to shoot some photos, too. It&#8217;s not only the lens which does the photo. Some are shot by telephones, if the photographer is an artist.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.ylovephoto.com/en/2008/11/26/web-sites-for-lens-reviews/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
