GAS is.... Good, GAS is right, GAS works.
papa wrote:
I think that your assertion of, "the difference between a kit lens and Zeiss is absolutely magical and can only be discerned by the viewer in the moment of "je ne sais quois". (Not DXOMark scores).... but that moment does exist.", is a bit skewed. DxOmark is one of, if not the most, extensive and comprehensive scientific sources to reference for lens quality. Look closely at the specific lens(es)/body combination at the top of the page and click on measurements. You'll be amazed. It does directly relate to the IQ for a given lens and so does this site;
http://www.imaging-resource.com/ YAH MON, GEAR MATTERS when you learn how to use it. My bag looks like this; Canon 5D Mark III, 7D, Tokina 16-28, Tamrons 24-70, 70-200, 150-600 all stabilized. This is my ultimate gear that I could afford and I'm pleased I did a lot of reviews one all these before buying. Do you thinks it would have been better for me to a a HOG what I should buy???? Right! That's what I'll do next time. Just kidding. I made it to this level of gear starting with Fuji bridge (crap), then in succession Canon T1i, 50D, 7D, 5D Mk II, and last 5D Mark III and 2.8 glass. Now, I'm satisfied. That's my personal experience and it serves me great. No more GAS, just working it.
I think that your assertion of, "the differen... (
show quote)
I think we are in agreement. The DXOnark comment was related to being able to "experience" the difference vs "understanding" the difference. DXOMark will tell you the difference in the lens performance and is part of mybcriteria also for deciding on lenses...no one ever cried looking at an MTF chart but a weĺl PP'd photo from a FF camera and sharp lens at 1.8aperature has illicited some tears....not saying a kit lens on a crop camera shot in jpeg at 3.5 cant do the same but...well....its just not the same....je ne sais quois... :-)
Gear Acquisiton Syndrome ... distinguishing features of this affliction are the need to acquire more gear with no real discernable need other than "jus cuz".
Not be confused with Gear Aquisition with Cause (GAWC) - same as GAS but with a lofty and well practiced justification on the specific professional "need" for the lens.
Difference between the 2 is negligible. I am a GAWCer but about 75% is really just GAS.
...in the end, if it makes you happy and sparks your love of photography and you are not dipping into the kids University bank or going without food, load up on the gear !!
(P.S. I made up GAWC ... its not a "thing" )
cabbageseed wrote:
"GAS" is?
Gear Acquisition Syndrome
A term to describe, and, here on the Hog it seems, to denigrate people who buy new gear. As opposed to keeping and using your old gear until the Smithsonian comes looking for it.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.