good glass
Feb 10, 2014 00:08:07 #
amehta
Loc: Boston
LoneRangeFinder wrote:
Agree. Maybe "acceptable" rather than "magnificent".... There is a limit to the resolution of a lens irrespective of the skills of the photographer.
Personally, I want much more than "acceptable". :-)
Feb 10, 2014 00:17:53 #
amehta wrote:
Personally, I want much more than "acceptable". :-)
Well of course. I'm referring to the results possible with a "$200.00" piece of glass.
I'll give an example: I recently purchased a longer zoom to capture some birds in flight. I was disappointed in the results--my expectations were high. I'm still disappointed, however, my disappointment is tempered by a realization that I'm comparing what I was able to squeeze out of a zoom with those obtained from a prime-- a $600.00 lens compared to one several times more.
Feb 10, 2014 00:19:54 #
amehta wrote:
Maybe we first need to define "magnificent"?
While you "can", your odds and overall results improve significantly with better lenses.
While you "can", your odds and overall results improve significantly with better lenses.
EXACTLY!! :thumbup:
But why beat around the bush?
All other things being equal, superior glass WILL give you superior images.
And before someone brings up that tired old trope about the photographer being as important as the equipment, let me point out to you the following statement:
Quote:
All other things being equal
The photographer makes a difference? REALLY?
As my son would say "no sh#t Sherlock!" :roll:
Dale Jr. would win a HELLOVA lot more races in his company car than he would in my old Ford truck... PERIOD.
So let's stick to the topic at hand please... good glass. ;)
Feb 10, 2014 00:36:57 #
roy4711 wrote:
when we talk about good glass can we say zeiss is the best.
Roy, welcome to the Hog.
I would say that Zeiss is among the best, especially if youre a movie maker, which I am not.
For me, GOOD glass has to be of very good IQ, and it must be VERY fast. And so that all of that can be used in the real world, it must be Auto Focus. And if it's big, it must be light. Now THAT'S, a good lens. ;-)
SS
Feb 10, 2014 00:39:28 #
My screen name comes from a Conn 10M tenor saxophone I play occasionally.(10MPlayer) In the music world there's the same search for excellence through better equipment. "What mouthpiece will make me sound like X artist?" Or 'if I buy a 5 digit serial number Selmer Mark VI for $10,000 will I sound like Y?'
Sure a vintage 5 digit Selmer is going to sound a lot better than a $250 Chinese sax IN THE HANDS OF A PRO. But in the hands of an beginner it's not going to make much of a difference.
I think its pretty much the same with camera equipment. Sure, the $20,000 setup is going to do a better job of recording what you see but the vision, the art, is somewhere inside of the artist. I'm still searching for that artist in me. Like learning to play an instrument beautifully, creating beautiful photographs is a long slow process that takes dedication and a lot of time.
Sure a vintage 5 digit Selmer is going to sound a lot better than a $250 Chinese sax IN THE HANDS OF A PRO. But in the hands of an beginner it's not going to make much of a difference.
I think its pretty much the same with camera equipment. Sure, the $20,000 setup is going to do a better job of recording what you see but the vision, the art, is somewhere inside of the artist. I'm still searching for that artist in me. Like learning to play an instrument beautifully, creating beautiful photographs is a long slow process that takes dedication and a lot of time.
Feb 10, 2014 00:42:48 #
amehta
Loc: Boston
roy4711 wrote:
when we talk about good glass can we say zeiss is the best.
I like autofocus, and sometimes VR, and for me those are part of deciding what is "best".
Feb 10, 2014 07:29:03 #
Nikonian72 wrote:
You can say whatever you want. Results will always be the determining factor.
You took the words right out of my mouth! :D
Feb 10, 2014 08:27:23 #
roy4711 wrote:
when we talk about good glass can we say zeiss is the best.
Zeiss has some good lenses but then so does everyone else. If there was a best brand we'd all be using it.
Feb 10, 2014 08:50:53 #
lighthouse
Loc: No Fixed Abode
Maybe there is more to it than the normal metrics that get considered.
Lens collection A
Brand Enigma
ultrawide zoom, supersharp, very slight warm cast,
35mm F/1.4, great lens, seems a little cool,
50mm F/1.4, great sharp lens with delightful bokeh, slight green cast
85mm F/1.4, brilliant portrait lens, a bit warmer than the ultrawide
Lens collection B
Brand Z, 18mm F/3.5, 35 F/1.4, 50mm F/1.4, 85mm F/1.4
all exactly the same colour cast, all sharp, all buttery smooth manual focus, all with divine bokeh
skin tones and everything else exactly the same tone no matter which lens you put on.
Which lenses are better?
Lens collection A
Brand Enigma
ultrawide zoom, supersharp, very slight warm cast,
35mm F/1.4, great lens, seems a little cool,
50mm F/1.4, great sharp lens with delightful bokeh, slight green cast
85mm F/1.4, brilliant portrait lens, a bit warmer than the ultrawide
Lens collection B
Brand Z, 18mm F/3.5, 35 F/1.4, 50mm F/1.4, 85mm F/1.4
all exactly the same colour cast, all sharp, all buttery smooth manual focus, all with divine bokeh
skin tones and everything else exactly the same tone no matter which lens you put on.
Which lenses are better?
Feb 10, 2014 08:54:27 #
Talent is everything. The greater the talent, the more attractive will be better glass, or worse glass, depending on the look required. These days, the "worse" part can often be introduced in post, therefore the best original is usually the key.
Feb 10, 2014 09:01:03 #
ggttc wrote:
If you want a good glass to improve your skills...I gotta say "scotch".
Does the brand of hammer make you a better carpenter?
Does the brand of garden trowel make your roses prettier?
Does the brand of hammer make you a better carpenter?
Does the brand of garden trowel make your roses prettier?
The answer to both of your questions is a "yes" in some cases. I had a foam rubber hammer once. Poor results.
I had a garden trowel with a soft metal shaft. Kept bending. Couldn't dig a rose hole for nothing.
The morel is, yes skill plays a big part, but still, you rarely see the "skilled" photographer shooting with a Kodak disk camera.
Feb 10, 2014 09:03:48 #
Feb 10, 2014 09:04:27 #
Feb 10, 2014 09:05:12 #
roche8410
Loc: Arizona
Just starting out for me I stayed with a point and shoot for a year and than moved up the ladder to mid range and bought a prime lens. I decided to make the move when I started realizing the limitations of the camera as my skill improved. Buying the best you can afford at the time has always served me well. If you break the bank you can't afford go anywhere to enjoy shooting. So what's the point?
Feb 10, 2014 09:05:32 #
Nikonian72 wrote:
First, you gotta learn how to count.
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Not to make fun of the guy's probable typo, but that reply got me laughing this morning. Not bad for a Monday morning!
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.