Originally posted by SteveM I think we all know that there have been technical advances in lens design, but it's just as obvious that newer lenses will not necessarily give you a better picture.
this has been the issue all along equipment does not make the photo, photographers do
Quote: Sharpness is easy to measure, but other qualities that a lens can provide are much more difficult to quantify, and it is these qualities that can make, or break the impact of a photo.
although a lot of other things like contrast at least in relative terms, lateral CA, vignetting, color drift, etc, can be measured quite easily, there is no mathematical definition for bokeh that I know of (although there are some who are trying) or other out of focus rendering
Quote: Regarding quality, it's very presumptuous to think that advancements in lens construction will be used for betterment of the image a lens produces. Lenses are built to generate the company a profit, and to make them affordable, their creation must be as affordable as possible. Advancement in lens design can decrease the manufacturing cost of a lens while degrading quality. Some new lenses *are* better, but many, if not most, won't be.
how true it is. Just consider what a lens cost perhaps in 1980. My series 1 70-210F3.5 cost something like $350 cdn retail yet today I can get a tamron 70-200F2.8 for what?, $799? that is only double, but inflation (if I look at my house price now vs then suggests I should pay something closer to $2000. so I wholly agree, the advances have largely gone into cost reductions transferred in a large proportion to the consumer. If not, and the manufacturer's have kept more than their share, then the old lenses really are worth their weight in gold
Quote: The other issue is the automation of the equipment. Auto focus, auto aperture, flare control, etc etc. Are you controlling the result of your photo or is the camera? Most enthusiasts here will take some time to think about what it is that they are doing, but many growing up with automation simply don't.
i disagree, not with the sentiment but the lack of strength in it. My view is that most who have entered in the automated era
DEMANDnothing short of perfection, regardless of skill level or shooting conditions, with absolutely no realization of how much easier it is today to produce a technically competent photo compared to 30 years ago when I started
Quote: I agree that advancements have made it much easier to get a good photo, but it's also just as easy to plateau as a photographer. If one relies on the camera to think for them, what aperture to use, where to autofocus, they are chained to the limitations of the technology. You have to go out of your way to override the settings of the camera, instead of just using different settings as photographers did in the past. If you use new lenses because old ones are problematic for you to use, then you might have a bigger problem than lenses.
This is the argument also used against computer interfaces, all the advances have led to every one rising to the minimum level of competence, and remaining there.