Originally posted by Steve Grosvenor I read a very insightful commentary recently regarding how it has reached the point in lens development that there are very few really bad lenses. Yes some are exceptional in the right hands, but that under most circumstances are not most lenses able to yield respectable pictures?
You already ready got some sound advice. Let me share another "side of the coin".
The quality of the photographs has a lot to do with the photographer, that is the human being behind the camera, rather than the hardware. Everyone agrees but ..... I am not a professional photographer, but I use photography both for work and pleasure. When do I see some difference between lenses?
In practice, mostly in terms of the percentage of "keepers". High IQ lenses (often the more expensive ones) tend to give me a higher rate of photographs that I want to keep. I often found myself in situations when I have a to take photographs over a short period of time, under pressure or in rush. In such situations, I value a "good lens" because of the greater chance to be happy with the shots. A different situation is colour rendering. I found that I prefer some lenses over others because of the colour rendering. For example, I love the FA77 Ltd for portrait, because the shots please me more than any other lens.
To sum up, the situation is not black and white. But some lenses will fit your needs better, particularly in terms of "keeper rate".
My 5 cents....