Originally posted by biz-engineer Solving engineering problems is not a hobby, it's a job/profession, although getting challenged by DSLR photography and liking to learn and solve problems may be the motivation, that's a confusion. For me, photography is not a problem to be solved, it's a hobby. Saying "photography is a solved problem" is like saying cars are a solved problem. Thirty years ago, cars were able to bring you from A to B, and nowadays, cars are also able to go from A to B, interestingly, people still buy new cars (one could have a old car and still travel safely from A to B, but car designs evolve and a lot of people actually buy new cars without needing it, and a car is way more expensive relative to a camera). The expression "photography is a solved problem" is a sign of boredom. I know a number of people who stopped photography completely, they left their canon dslr in the cartons, moved on to other things in life, occasionally still take casual photos with their phone with no any artistic intend; It can happen that a hobby get low prio in life, like passion it comes and go, especially when we are young. I know a guy who went all the way through Canon DSLR and he then stopped photography as a specific hobby, sold everything Canon , got a Oly M43 dropped in his bag that he uses once a year during his vacation. I fully understand that.
But we are in the same situation as cars. Exactly. We are in a replacement market people buy again when the previous one broke. In car as the thing is more complex it can be when the expense to keep it in shape go too high or when things start to fall appart. One might think people buy car because they want a new one, not because the old one is just too old, but this is not the majority. Yes if you buy a new car that now drive entirely itself, that car solved a new problem, that for sure. But if basically that the same car as 10 year ago, with 2-3 more gadgets, the most benefit is the plastic and fabric is new, there no big spending on repair and so on...
Here for example, the average age of a car in the country is about 8 years old. And I am in a western, so called "rich" country. Sure some people still think they need to have a new one every 3 years, or even every 6 months, but the thing shift.
As for that lens and my motivation this is just that I have different priorities. I would accept to have a lens that big/heavy if it was a 200mm f/2.8 or f/2, even if I would be unlikely to buy it. Here I know you can make truely fantastic lenses for 1/4 of the size weight. I could understand 1/2 of the size/weight even if I would not buy it.
Ultimately, this is not a matter of price, if I had unlimited founds, I go for a Leica and a set of small primes. I'd not buy inflated lenses just for the sake of having the biggest in town or wining sharpness reviews.
As for mobile phone I don't know why you insist on that, the only photo I take with mine is for example to keep some trace of a discussions and drawing done at work on the white board for a design... For photos, I use the K3... As if no artistic intent or obvious lack of sharpness with my gear, I don't think so, even if I think I am far from being good. But I know the gear isn't the problem.
This is taken recently with my diminutively small, 20 years in the design, terribly soft lenses...
FA77, f/2.5
FA77 f/2.5
FA77 f/3.5
I don't think sharpness or the lens rendering is to put to fault there, by far. If you don't like the photos, it from the photographer that has it would seems not artistic goal, not the gear.
But I wonder? When so many people, you included post quite average bird shots... It is with or without artistic intents? I mean criticizing other people doing is easy
And there so many average birds shots posted there because the light, the subject distance, and yes because lack of sharpness and noise come into play that I really wonder if the priority shall really be a bit better 50mm at the expense of size/weight/price or something to help all theses birders photographers finally getting acceptably sharp, not too noisy shots? Again criticism is easy but for me, yes lens sharpness for 24-200mm is a solved problem, even more so on primes, what we speak of there. Getting more, doesn't improve noticably the actual pictures.
As the problem is solved, it make more sense, yes to focus on artistics aspects of the photo or if we still speak of gear to focus on practical aspects like a reasonable price so more can afford it, a reasonable size/weight so it is a joy to use and not something that stay at home... So that new DFA50 lens? It is made to win reviews, not to be practical. As such it will be big/expensive/heavy. Many people there will speak higly of it, but few will buy it, even less will use it as their default lens on their camera...
5
But yes, I understand this is not really the goal. The lens is just like when a car manufacturer invest in formula one. But this also mean we still don't have any plan for a practical 50mm with snappy AF motor, no CA... The only true FF lens available and practical to use and affordable new remain the DFA50 f/2.8 and the FA50 f/1.4 the other are stated as not compatible with FF by Pentax and the DFA50 again is a formula one, not a lens that many will buy or use...
Last edited by Nicolas06; 03-10-2017 at 01:06 AM.