>>4046039>Why would you think it isn't true, Because it doesn't make sense physically and another tester with a good reputation did not find this. Far more likely that OL fucked this test up.
>>>4046036>>These 2 lenses are comparable on price>Amazon have the Sony at £209 and the canon at £459. Amazon UK only lists a used version of the Sony lens, they don't have it new right now.
>That's very disingenuous of you to use a lens that costs more than twice as much. That's very disingenuous of you to compare used and new pricing.
>Especially disingenuous due to your attempt to lie about their respective prices. Especially disingenuous due to your attempt to accuse others of lying when you're the liar.
