IMHO they are flawed...
Compare their rating on 50mm lenses. Take their highest rated 50, the Outus 55 with a score of 50 and compare it to the freshman Nikon Z 50/1.8S with a total score of 44. Now compare each individual testing metric... The Nikon lens beats it by 6 points in sharpness, ties it in distortion, ties it in vignetting, loses to it by a measly 0.2 on transmission, and beats it by 4 on chromatic aberration. So why -- better HOW -- do they justify giving the Outus 4 more total points? In fact, the Sigma ART 50 BEATS the Outus on ALL test metrics except transmission (0.1) and CA (3 pts) -- so I guess those get somehow weighted 4 worse points than all the other wins totaled? :wtf: What am I missing? Do they give extra points for max aperture? Oh wait, no because the Sigma is also f1.4... Do they give extra points for higher MSRPs? Do they take away points for AF???
Compare their rating on 50mm lenses. Take their highest rated 50, the Outus 55 with a score of 50 and compare it to the freshman Nikon Z 50/1.8S with a total score of 44. Now compare each individual testing metric... The Nikon lens beats it by 6 points in sharpness, ties it in distortion, ties it in vignetting, loses to it by a measly 0.2 on transmission, and beats it by 4 on chromatic aberration. So why -- better HOW -- do they justify giving the Outus 4 more total points? In fact, the Sigma ART 50 BEATS the Outus on ALL test metrics except transmission (0.1) and CA (3 pts) -- so I guess those get somehow weighted 4 worse points than all the other wins totaled? :wtf: What am I missing? Do they give extra points for max aperture? Oh wait, no because the Sigma is also f1.4... Do they give extra points for higher MSRPs? Do they take away points for AF???