Rongnongno Loc: FL

Actually the answer as the question is asked is: YES, a prime lens still makes a difference regardless of software used.

crazydaddio Loc: Toronto Ontario Canada

Do not get a high quality lens. Stick to the kit lens !!!!

(I say this only to warn you against that first hit and hook of IQ goodness that comes from your first shot off your new Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art. Once you inject that level of IQ and Bokeh into your workflow...the hook is in...GAS and divorce are the only 2 outcomes... :-)

warrior Loc: Paso Robles CA

Amen

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Cole, you can NOT make an image sharper in software...., PERIOD!
You can add contrast to the edges of lines making them stand out more but that is NOT sharper.
The lens profiles in software only help with aberrations but not sharpness.
You want sharp, get a SHARP lens.
The question has always been only, how sharp, is sharp enough!?! Good luck with your PP.
SS

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Sharpness is subjective. Acuity and contrast are measurable entities.

An image that is considered "sharp" usually has good contrast, and may or may not have high acuity.

In the context of a a large print at "normal" viewing distances, the average person will never be able to see a difference in an image made with a $2,000 lens and a kit lens if both were taken at F8. Anyone who takes issue with this has never tested this.

That being said, image quality is not just about sharpness. Pro lenses generally have better correction for aberrations, have larger max apertures, and if used on a crop sensor camera, more uniform image quality across the image field.

To a degree, software can add in contrast and correct some aberrations, increasing apparent sharpness and improving image quality, but it cannot put in fine detail that is not in the original capture.

JPL

Yes there is still need for sharp lenses, software helps but it will not replace a sharp lens or make up for a soft lens. The need for sharp lenses is more obvious the more you want to enlarge your picture in print or when viewing. For typical social media posting the sharpness does not matter.

Grnway Loc: Manchester, NH

Amen on that Amen! The one thing that PP software cannot completely fix is lack of sharpness. Sure, you can manipulate it to maybe optimize the slightly soft appearance, but sharpness comes out of the lens. I have to agree that the Sigma 1.4 ART lens is amazingly sharp!

TonyL Loc: Coventry, UK

You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. If an image is 'soft' (considered to be a less hurtful description than out of focus) it's because it's out of focus, to whatever extent. No software on earth can change that

Crombie

I agree. Careful post processing can even surpass premium lens quality. The need for premium lenses is for pros needing the extra light gathering of an f4 vs. say a f1.4 or 1.2.

On this topic there's the important element related to 'pride of ownership'. I believe in most cases this motivates the shooter to live up to the status of a premium optic and ego takes more care and thought when making a photograph.

Szalajj Loc: Salem, NH

To each his own. I'm sure that the "Quality" of your snapshots are just fine for your own purposes.

But some newer up and coming photographers strive to obtain the best quality straight out of the camera shots that they can get, and those only happen when they're using a better quality glass for their needs.

"GAS" (Gear Acquisition Syndrome) most often comes into play when someone hasn't done their homework before purchasing new equipment. They're buying the latest and greatest, because it's new to the market and they want to be among the first to own it, it's not something that they actually "NEED" to pursue their craft. Many individuals simply throw away money on their GAS attacks.

No manner of Post Processing can recover all blown shots. Yes as others have said, there are options to sharpen a poor quality shot, but in the process they are often degraded even further.

There is no substitute for getting it right the first time in the camera, and that includes the actual quality of the glass chosen to pair with any given camera.

New photographers need to learn to get the most out of their equipment with settings and sharp in focus shots before moving on to new equipment.

That next step up should be to get the best quality glass that they can afford, with an eye towards future camera body upgrades. Buy wisely the first time, and that purchase will last you a lifetime.

But if you spend money on low quality glass, you'll find yourself out growing that purchase very quickly. Research, and trying out various lenses either by borrowing them, or renting them could save you a lot of money in the long run.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Right. You can sharpen what the lens gives you, but software cannot work miracles. To get good results, you need a good camera, a good lens, good software, and good skill using all three.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

While a lot can be corrected in post processing, personally, I want the start with the best possible image I can, and then work at improving it. Yes you can take a so-so image and improve it to be workable.. but, if you had started with a good image, your results will still be as good or better.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Even with good software there is a big difference. Today kit lenses are of excellent quality and at their "sweet spot" they tend to perform very well but the quality of a professional lens has no comparison. Many professional lenses sport a large aperture and besides sharpness that makes them better in low light.
One problem when sharpening is the presence of halos. I always enlarge in the computer my images to 50% so that I can see them to be prepared to correct the problem. JPEG are more prone to halos than RAW files.
I have noticed that even when I shoot RAW a certain amount of sharpness is automatically added by the software to the point that many times no further sharpening is necessary.
A professional lens when it comes to sharpness will beat any day a kit lens and there must be a reason why they are more expensive.

Crombie

I again agree, well 90%. Marketing strategies in the photo industry will always preach buy this super duper wiz bang lense. I had a show of 30x40 prints shot with humble 8 megapixel camera with a good kit lense. Some discerning photographers did examine them up close and personal and their comments beyond how lovely the photos were (lol) the consensus was the photos were made with nothing less than a full frame 20+ mp camera.

Most non pros want to emulate the 'pros' and this greatly encourages the purchasing of premium, expensive equipment.

There's a catch '22' with this. Having expensive premium equipment discourages taking their treasures out on dizzily days let alone during a gully washer. I had a 2 hour plus shoot during a torrential blowing rain storm and my Pentax K20D mated with a weather friendly lense was like a duck impervious to the elements. I'm not sure how many photographers really beleive in the claims of weather sealing. My Olympus EM5 MK2 also is like a duck in heavy rain.

This is observation is based on my 20 or so years as a photo instructor.

bmike101 Loc: Gainesville, Florida

Well, if you need to save money I would say yes. But if it is a business expense can't you write it off come tax season?

unedited


edited