Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-14-2011, 09:17 AM   #31
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
the answer is yes, because we can

I think people get caught up in this because we can do it today.

but when you think about it, how many forum members are there out here vs pentax camera owners?

we probably represent a very small percentage of pentax users, but a very large percentage of people who in the film era (i.e. BD) either did own a darkroom (self included) or would have owned one (for those who are of the digital only era) if digital did not come about.

Just to put this into context, I am writing this on a 22 inch monitor. which measures almost perfectly to 19 inch by 13 inch , the biggest sheet of paper I can put into my HP printer. BUT, if I map pixel to pixel from my K7 i need 9 monitors to display a fll image. This may not seem too bad for those who shot slides, and looked at projected images on a 4 foot wide screen (about the same size) BUT you did not sit within 2 feet of the screen most of the time when viewing.

Yes, we really do look a lot closer at things, and yes we are critical, sometimes too critical, but it is only because we can.

If all you are shooting is 4x6 prints, what you shoot with is almost irrelevant.

04-14-2011, 09:21 AM   #32
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
QuoteOriginally posted by Mr_Canuck Quote
I would agree and disagree. I've seen differences apparent quite easily on my 27" monitor. One example is bokeh. On a 'lesser' lens it can be nervous and harsh, and on a 'better' lens it can be smooth and pleasing. Colour is another area and though you can post-process, there are differences. But certainly it's when you print large that you start to see.

I think that great shots can be gotten with a $50 18-55mm lens, and really bad shots can be taken with a $1,000 lens. I also know that I can use narrow depth of field as a crutch on a faster lens but can also use it to artfully create something beautiful.

My final answer? Yes, we fuss to much.

We should take more photos and talk about the photos more than the lenses that might take the photos. And I'm guilty of that as much as anyone.

And indeed the Internet fuels LBA. Boy oh boy, does it. But it fuels anything if you let it. Hi, my name is Mr_Canuck, and I just bought another lens.......
I agree 100%, people need to make the distinction between "better" and "lesser" and understand that these terms have no relevance with cost.

Aside from that, regardless of adjectives used to describe lenses, and I consider the cost an adjective here, what makes an IMAGE is the photographer, who understands how his equipment works, and uses it to his advantage. for that reason, and that reason alone, it is not a question of asking which lens is the "best" in absolute terms, but which lens is the best relitive to what you want to accomplish, and asking any 2 photographers that question will result in potentially 2 opposite answers based upon their individual shooting styles
04-14-2011, 09:35 AM   #33
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
The fact is that even cheap consumer lenses of today probably outperform some of the best lenses of 60 years ago. But psychologically, once the bar has been raised, it is hard to lower it again.

Rob
04-14-2011, 11:00 AM   #34
Veteran Member
Jimfear's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 576
QuoteOriginally posted by robgo2 Quote
The fact is that even cheap consumer lenses of today probably outperform some of the best lenses of 60 years ago. But psychologically, once the bar has been raised, it is hard to lower it again.

Rob
Whow... careful with what you're saying now. Old does not equal bad. In terms of zooms newer is often better but when speaking of simple designs (think Planar/Tessar) there hasn't been that much improvement over the last 60 years, it was good then and it still is.

As for the OP, we might fuss too much about the quality of lenses. But then again regardless that I don't print large too often I still like getting that unintentional smile on my face when blowing up a photo on the screen (and even more when the D700-2.8-zoom-guy remarks "holy crap, what lens was that shot with?!"). Also the quality is in the handling of the lens, if it's better built it's nicer to use and I enjoy it more. As I'm not making money of my shooting I think the level of enjoyment is highly relevant, and I'm ready to spend a little more to get it.

04-14-2011, 11:57 AM   #35
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
QuoteOriginally posted by robgo2 Quote
The fact is that even cheap consumer lenses of today probably outperform some of the best lenses of 60 years ago. But psychologically, once the bar has been raised, it is hard to lower it again.

Rob
I would beg to differ here slightly.

while I do not disagree that zoom lenses specifically have benefited tremendously with new materials coatings and optical designs, this is not always the case with primes.

the one area where it is true, across the board is lens coatings however, where even the best old lenses cannot hold thier own against flare to even the cheapest new lenses, but aside from flare, sharpness, bokeh etc are pretty much a lens by lens debate as to whether an old lens is better or not than a new one. Much of that debate has to do with specific personal preferences and will never end
04-14-2011, 02:46 PM   #36
Moderator PEG Judges
Kerrowdown's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Highlands of Scotland.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 32,757
QuoteOriginally posted by SpecialK Quote
But the in-lens stabilization is better
Now there's a thing I didn't know.
04-14-2011, 03:42 PM   #37
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
I would beg to differ here slightly.

while I do not disagree that zoom lenses specifically have benefited tremendously with new materials coatings and optical designs, this is not always the case with primes.

the one area where it is true, across the board is lens coatings however, where even the best old lenses cannot hold thier own against flare to even the cheapest new lenses, but aside from flare, sharpness, bokeh etc are pretty much a lens by lens debate as to whether an old lens is better or not than a new one. Much of that debate has to do with specific personal preferences and will never end
Please note that I specified "some" of the best lenses of yesteryear. I do realize that excellent optics were available back in the day, although the materials and coatings were not up to today's standards. I would also add that regardless of the quality of old glass, it was for the most part being coupled with film that was very inferior to more modern films and especially to digital sensors. Yes, I know all about the lovely grain patterns and the wonders of MF and LF film (which most photographers never used.) The point is that regardless of the how good the lenses were, the final IQ was, for the most part, not up to what can be gotten with today's consumer grade lenses and entry level DSLRs. Please understand that I am not knocking old school photography. Rather I am responding to the original query as to whether we obsess too much about lens quality. I offer it as food for thought.

Rob
04-14-2011, 04:11 PM   #38
Loyal Site Supporter
dadipentak's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,409
Fussin's Fun

Have you ever heard fly fishermen discuss fly rods? Or even better/worse, been stuck in the midst of a group of wine buffs?

We're sort of like that (only our obsessions are more consequential, of course ;~)

04-14-2011, 04:30 PM   #39
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
QuoteOriginally posted by dadipentak Quote
Have you ever heard fly fishermen discuss fly rods? Or even better/worse, been stuck in the midst of a group of wine buffs?

We're sort of like that (only our obsessions are more consequential, of course ;~)
You mean like which version of 50mm lens is the best? Personally I only have five 50's so I'm not qualified yet to discuss it
04-14-2011, 05:02 PM   #40
Veteran Member
Chex's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,700
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
Yup he's right, I'm selling my all primes and going back to my Sigma 17-70
GREAT! I've been looking for a good deal on a DA15
04-14-2011, 05:26 PM   #41
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
FWIW, I have no problem agreeing with the basic premise - difference in IQ between lenses are very overrated, and even mediocre lenses are really good enough for most purposes. But differences in maximum aperture and also in general usability (size, weight, AF speed, MF feel, etc) are pretty significant to me.
04-15-2011, 12:15 AM   #42
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,913
Hi
Some time ago I posted my thoughts on a similar topic mainly to do with long zooms or primes. May I take the liberty and point you to my post at:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/114743-da*-60-...ml#post1382417 post No. 62

Perhaps it is only relevant in part here.

Greetings
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
advantage, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, slr lens, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Even all that fuss, I still did it! Mystic Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 11-26-2009 08:11 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:48 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top