Considering Print Size when Buying a Lens?
Dec 11, 2014 07:39:58 #
In a current discussion of Tamron vs Nikon for a particular lens, no one mentioned intended print size as a decision factor. ???
If I never print larger than, say 8x10, isn't that a determinant in selecting a lens?
If I never print larger than, say 8x10, isn't that a determinant in selecting a lens?
Dec 11, 2014 07:43:51 #
Print size and quality is determined by the sensor.
As far as lens choices go, I only buy Canon EF.
As far as lens choices go, I only buy Canon EF.
Dec 11, 2014 08:00:42 #
Sorry, I'm trying to think about how the lens makes a difference, other than if you need to crop a photo because your lens was too short? If you properly frame your image, what you see is what you get. Hope that helps.
I'll be interested to see if I've been wrong in all these years. It DOES happen. More than I'd like to admit sometimes.
Good question. Maybe we'll all learn something.
I'll be interested to see if I've been wrong in all these years. It DOES happen. More than I'd like to admit sometimes.
Good question. Maybe we'll all learn something.
Dec 11, 2014 09:58:45 #
Dec 11, 2014 10:30:59 #
What I think Pat means is that you do not need as sharp a lens to make a good 8x10 print as you would need to make poster or larger size print. The sensor matters, but so does the lens. A kit lens will make a good 8x10, but I wouldn't recommend one to make a billboard.
Dec 11, 2014 11:01:11 #
MarkD wrote:
What I think Pat means is that you do not need as sharp a lens to make a good 8x10 print as you would need to make poster or larger size print. The sensor matters, but so does the lens. A kit lens will make a good 8x10, but I wouldn't recommend one to make a billboard.
Hurrah! That's exactly what I meant. Thanks!
So in the discussion about,"Should I buy a Tamron or a Nikon 70-200 f/2.8?" I still wonder why none of the big boys asked about what size prints do you intend to make. I would guess that maybe 40% of the members on this list do not print larger than 8x10 (family album stuff) And would be hard pressed to justify anything beyond a D7100 with kit lenses.
Dec 11, 2014 11:04:52 #
Patw28 wrote:
In a current discussion of Tamron vs Nikon for a particular lens, no one mentioned intended print size as a decision factor. ???
If I never print larger than, say 8x10, isn't that a determinant in selecting a lens?
If I never print larger than, say 8x10, isn't that a determinant in selecting a lens?
Nope.
Dec 11, 2014 11:07:38 #
I never print larger than 8.5x11 (usually no larger than 6.7x10), but there are other reasons to get lenses other than the kit lenses besides sharpness. There's focal length, lens speed, and build quality just to name three.
Dec 11, 2014 11:45:52 #
rpavich wrote:
Nope.
Yup!
The original:
"I'm interested in purchasing a 24-70 2.8 for photographing my twin grand girls and as a good low light for anything else I might want to shoot. I've read reviews, but wonder what your opinions are. Is the Nikon glass worth the extra cash?"
Whether asked about this specific lens or the more general question, "Is the Nikon worth it?" "How do you intend to use it?" must predicate the reply. In the case, "What size prints will the grand girls be wanting?" is certainly a determinant.
I'll lay even money they aren't thinking about displaying in an art gallery.
To give them an open ended response that, "Yes, a Nikon is worth the extra cash," would be to do them a grievous disservice.
Dec 11, 2014 14:16:59 #
I've seen stunning images made with kit lenses. I've seen crappy ones with extremely good lenses. Personally, I choose a lens for the speed first. Not that I shoot at 2.8. I rarely do, but it greatly helps in focusing. You can get bad copies of Nikon lenses, just like you can with Sigma or Tamron. I've purchased all of them, and if they don't live up to my expectations, I return for another one. If I get 2 bad copies, I'll switch brands. Generally, as a rule, I read reviews and check on things like focus speed, and will go with a less expensive lens, unless the review says that the focus is incredibly slow. There are some out there... Only if I can't find a good Sigma or Tammy, then will I pay the big bucks.
Dec 12, 2014 05:52:43 #
Some kit lenses are great. Some Tamron or Sigma lenses are not.
FWIW, when I went full frame I more or less invested in Nikon glass instead of the others. Been rather fortunate, even with a used Nikon lens.
That said said my macro lenses are not Nikon. Also my the fisheye and wide zoom are not.
My two favorites zooms are 24/130 f4 and 28/300. My two favorite primes are the 50 1.4 and 85 1.8.
FWIW, when I went full frame I more or less invested in Nikon glass instead of the others. Been rather fortunate, even with a used Nikon lens.
That said said my macro lenses are not Nikon. Also my the fisheye and wide zoom are not.
My two favorites zooms are 24/130 f4 and 28/300. My two favorite primes are the 50 1.4 and 85 1.8.
Dec 12, 2014 05:58:12 #
Patw28 wrote:
In a current discussion of Tamron vs Nikon for a particular lens, no one mentioned intended print size as a decision factor. ???
If I never print larger than, say 8x10, isn't that a determinant in selecting a lens?
If I never print larger than, say 8x10, isn't that a determinant in selecting a lens?
When I want to buy a lens, I read reviews and consider prices. I'm not going spend double just so that I can print larger. For professionals, it's a different story.
Dec 12, 2014 08:24:21 #
Patw28 wrote:
In a current discussion of Tamron vs Nikon for a particular lens, no one mentioned intended print size as a decision factor. ???
If I never print larger than, say 8x10, isn't that a determinant in selecting a lens?
If I never print larger than, say 8x10, isn't that a determinant in selecting a lens?
If you don't print larger than 8X10 the only lens consideration I can think of would be a macro vs. a non macro but I think you are referring more to lens quality rather than functionality and I'd say up to 8X10 there isn't going to be much difference in quality compared to price range assuming the 8X10 that is being printed is or is nearly the full frame of whatever camera is being used. If you are cropping away 50% or more of the photo and blowing up the center or other small portion of the photo to 8X10 than of course that gets into another whole consideration.
Dec 12, 2014 09:29:47 #
I feel buying a lens is worth buying good. I also will not buy a NOT FULL FRAME LENS. Quality is has mouthing to do with the picture size. Camera bodies change but lenses are for ever. I change camera bodies when the sensor system improves.
Dec 12, 2014 10:26:39 #
For most people cost is an issue. With a limited budget one must balance cost vs quality. Is it worth the extra money to get more image quality than one needs? You can't answer that for someone else. We all have to answer that for ourselves.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.