I am responding to this quote with "tongue in cheek". First off, I am somewhat offended that the lenses from the 60's and 70's are considered vintage. Heck I was born in the thirties, I certainly don't think of myself as "vintage". Most all of my new lenses were purchased during those time frames and since they have not worn out or quit working I have seen no need to replace them, they are still my new lenses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed_Davor
I certainly did not buy them originally to create a "retro" look for my photography. My mentors implied that if I wanted a particular look for my images, that I would need to acquire the additional skills necessary to dream up and create that look. The camera and lens was not considered to be the foundation of a particular "look". At that same time few photographers ever looked at the out of focus areas of their photographs as contributing components to a good image. Most often heard was "damn I wish I could of
held more sharpness in this soft area". Thousands of dollars are now changing hands in searching for the "Holy Grail" of lenses, not with sharpness in mind, but what best reproduces the out of focus areas of a scene. As I have said in the past,"it don't take much to confuse me". :-)
I will get over being considered vintage myself, but I don't wanna hear no lip about "my new lenses" being vintage! :-) Gotta git out of here and go clean my 105/2.5 Nikkor.