Originally posted by jsherman999 Lenses can work the same way.
I like this. But part of me is thinking... well what about all of the other tools out there?
I am a very suspicious person by nature - and I am particularly suspicious of motivations. Justification for an expensive tool is suspicious, but so is an aversion to anything expensive.
I really have a problem when, no matter one's intended use, they are guided to blow their budget on an FA ltd. I used to get into very silly arguments with people when they would suggest: "skip the DA 40, you will always wonder about the FA 43". It does not matter to them what the person intends to use the lens for (i.e., FA 43 is going be better at some things, DA 40 is going to be better at other things.
Jsherman, I don't want to play favourites, but I think you are the finest and most consistent photographer on this forum. You can make any lens look good - and you also have a rather tempered approach to this whole discussion, which I can respect.
At the end of the day, though, I do think that a lot of lenses are completely looked over because they aren't a limited (DA or FA), and this is simply biased. In fact, it is brand loyalty, and I am particularly suspicious of that motivation. There are more than 3 lenses out there that have dust, and it's such a personal call, that I would think that you would have trouble quantitatively determining which do and which do not, unless you do it by democratic vote.
This approach works insofar as it allows you to distinguish between two popular decisions, but it removes the personal component from the equation... which is *all* I believe to be important.
Lets get back to guitars. I'm sure you can hear the difference between one guitar and another, Todd. I happen to prefer the sound of humbuckers to single coils, and I can pick out a fender vs. grestch vs. gibson at will in a dense mix. However, this does not make one better than the other. If X player connects with Y guitar better, and they sing together, that does *not* suggest that Y guitar is superior to Z. In fact, it tells you more about the player. A heavy handed guitarist might sound best with a 24 3/4 scale guitar, a Jazz player who prefers complex runs might prefer the tension caused by a 25 1/2 scale guitar, etc. Give the wrong player the wrong guitar and it will sound terrible (me and a strat), however, if you give someone else the exact same guitar, it will sing.
Pixie dust is the product of a complex relationship. I say, forget the labels. Sure, try the FAs out... just realize they aren't going to give you pixie dust. Your pixie might still be out in the woods, waiting for you to find it. Magic comes in all forms.
Some of the greatest tastemakers (when it comes to gear) bought really cheap stuff because it was all they could afford. It was far outside of the mainstream, and through trial and error, these individuals forged a unique voice. Now a lot of those undesirable objects are worth big bucks on the vintage market because "Nels Cline played (through) one!"
I mean, come on. You don't think that hipster's fascination with disposable cameras has anything to do with Terry Richardson (who, after reaching a certian level of success, finally bought a DSLR and only uses the onboard flash and a zoom to emulate the look of a point-and-shoot)?
To some, a point and shoot has the pixie dust.
Enjoy what you love, and do what you enjoy
. Let's not encourage everyone to love the same thing. We are a competitive enough culture as it is.