And when we learn to take pictures without camera bodies the results might be relevant.
Yet more critical over analysis of a non relevant point. How a D810 and Nikon 24-70 f2.8 performs compared to a 5D MkIII and 24-70 f2.8 is all I, as an educated camera system buyer, want to know.
You mean uneducated?
Some people want to know how good a lens actually is. When you couple it with a body, that drags down the actual capabilities of a lens to that of the body.
I'd like to know the actual resolution of a lens regardless of body.
Some might, I was just trying to head off the inevitable 'my ?? is better than your ??' because when taken out of context the result, however interesting and informative, has little practical application.
Nobody in their right mind is going to have their buying decisions, or even their shooting choices, impacted by these results, and anybody with the gear crossover should already know what works better for them. Sure this lens might have fractionally less field curvature than that lens, put in the context of dof, framing, lens changing, exposure, focus, framing, subject, light, artistic merit, post processing etc etc the outcome is so minor as to not make any real world difference.
Say I had two 5D MkIII's and a 24-70 and a 70-200 and was shooting a wedding, I need 70mm, what camera/lens combo do I need? The one in my hand, the one I just shot 35mm with, the one I just shot 180mm with, the one I am going to use after the 70mm shot? On and on, my thought as to what lens is going to give me "more" doesn't factor into it.
Or, I want to shoot a landscape at 70mm, which do I use? Well again the miniscue differences in bench tested aberrations doesn't really matter because my dof is going to cover a mutitude of sins and post processing is going to cover the rest.
Sure this has an academic value, my point was, it is only academic.
To be sure, I really like Roger's blog, he writes some very interesting articles and gives seemingly unbiased views on pretty much everybody, I wish there were more like him, his testing seems very balanced, fair and consistent, his results posted with similar common sense and notes as to practical application. He is well aware of the furor taking these kinds of results out of context can create, how is calling for relevance and moderation a bad thing?