What's more important when choosing a lens

ll_coffee_lP · 08-02-2010, 04:27 AM

My lens choices were all made because of their specific image rendering (i.e. bokeh, image pop, warm/cold tone, etc.).

c[_]

ChooseAName · 08-02-2010, 05:16 AM

Originally posted by future_retro

Ok well I guess this applies more to people like me trying to build a capable collection off their kit lenses on a reasonable budget, everyone must have been there once

I'm in the same boat as you are, I think, as far as building up a collection. I chose the "does something different" option. Currently, I only have a FA 50/1.4 and an FA 35/2. The 50 was my first lens, and the 35 was different (from 50) enough for me. If I were in the market for another lens, I'd be thinking either the DA 21 or something with much a much longer focal length, maybe the DA* 50-135. It would depend on my needs, but I'd almost definitely get a focal length that I currently don't have.

That's just for where I am now in my photography journey though. I'm sure later on if/when I start doing MF more, I might chuck the 50/1.4 for a 50/1.7.

future_retro · 08-02-2010, 02:04 PM

I'm surprised by the results so far, I though it would be pretty even on both sides but option 2 has been well in the lead ever since the 3rd or 4th person voted

RioRico · 08-02-2010, 02:40 PM

I voted A, but it's really apples and oranges... and peaches and nectarines and kiwi fruit too, if we consider more factors. How about these choices for the question, What drives you to buy a lens?

a- Novelty, features
b- Better image quality
c- Budget budget budget
d- Collect the whole set
e- Appearance and feel
f- Antiquity, weirdness
g- None of the above

Some of these obviously overlap. For instance, my Schneider Betavaron enlarger zoom was cheap (US$70 marked down from US$3k); it looks and feels like nothing else I have; it has typical outstanding Schneider quality, and novel features (fixed-focus enlarger zoom!); and using it is just WEIRD. Or the massive, damaged 12-inch f/7 Gundlach large-format lens that produces glowing halos and soft rendering: cheap (US$3), ancient (about a century), weird (sitting at the end of 0.3m of extension tubes and bellows).

For IQ, I have a nice batch of Takumars et al. Now I'm looking for glass to do new, odd stuff. Yes, I'll admit it -- I'm a thrill-seeker, a novelty hound, an excitement addict. MORE KICKS!!

SpecialK · 08-02-2010, 03:01 PM

I would get a lens that can do new things, unless the lens you had was used all the time and was crap.

View Poll Results: Which is more important
Lens that can do new things	12	30.00%
Lens with better image quality	28	70.00%
Voters: 40. You may not vote on this poll

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
About Lens Hoods IMPORTANT!	MightyMike	Pentax Lens Articles	57	03-28-2019 04:10 AM
Choosing which lens to use	MSM	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	11-22-2009 11:00 PM
Need help choosing my next lens!!	Nimrad	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	02-15-2009 03:12 PM
Help Choosing a New Lens	IronWolf	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	02-15-2009 12:44 PM
What is the most important factor in choosing a lens?	slip	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	12-11-2006 05:38 PM

08-02-2010, 04:27 AM	#16
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	My lens choices were all made because of their specific image rendering (i.e. bokeh, image pop, warm/cold tone, etc.). c[_]

08-02-2010, 05:16 AM	#17
ChooseAName Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Southeast USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 390	Originally posted by future_retro Ok well I guess this applies more to people like me trying to build a capable collection off their kit lenses on a reasonable budget, everyone must have been there once I'm in the same boat as you are, I think, as far as building up a collection. I chose the "does something different" option. Currently, I only have a FA 50/1.4 and an FA 35/2. The 50 was my first lens, and the 35 was different (from 50) enough for me. If I were in the market for another lens, I'd be thinking either the DA 21 or something with much a much longer focal length, maybe the DA* 50-135. It would depend on my needs, but I'd almost definitely get a focal length that I currently don't have. That's just for where I am now in my photography journey though. I'm sure later on if/when I start doing MF more, I might chuck the 50/1.4 for a 50/1.7.

08-02-2010, 02:04 PM	#18
future_retro Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Western Washington Posts: 572 Original Poster	I'm surprised by the results so far, I though it would be pretty even on both sides but option 2 has been well in the lead ever since the 3rd or 4th person voted

08-02-2010, 02:40 PM	#19
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	I voted A, but it's really apples and oranges... and peaches and nectarines and kiwi fruit too, if we consider more factors. How about these choices for the question, What drives you to buy a lens? a- Novelty, features b- Better image quality c- Budget budget budget d- Collect the whole set e- Appearance and feel f- Antiquity, weirdness g- None of the above Some of these obviously overlap. For instance, my Schneider Betavaron enlarger zoom was cheap (US$70 marked down from US$3k); it looks and feels like nothing else I have; it has typical outstanding Schneider quality, and novel features (fixed-focus enlarger zoom!); and using it is just WEIRD. Or the massive, damaged 12-inch f/7 Gundlach large-format lens that produces glowing halos and soft rendering: cheap (US$3), ancient (about a century), weird (sitting at the end of 0.3m of extension tubes and bellows). For IQ, I have a nice batch of Takumars et al. Now I'm looking for glass to do new, odd stuff. Yes, I'll admit it -- I'm a thrill-seeker, a novelty hound, an excitement addict. MORE KICKS!!

08-02-2010, 03:01 PM	#20
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,481	I would get a lens that can do new things, unless the lens you had was used all the time and was crap.