Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,487   Posts: 1,571,308   Online: 735
      
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 79
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,059
    Lens manufactures release resolution data on their lenses. If I am going to spend my hard earned money then I want to make the best decision. Published lens resolution charts give the buyer that information.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    222
    Why do we talk such rubbish about lenses?

    Because mine are clearly better than yours.

  3. #23
    Newt_on_Swings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,002
    Pointless article, and not even proof read (unless he really did shoot 400 speed film the odd film speed of 40). The macro lens is specialized for macro why shoot at infinity for comparison?

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,286
    Images
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    Lens manufactures release resolution data on their lenses. If I am going to spend my hard earned money then I want to make the best decision. Published lens resolution charts give the buyer that information.
    Only if you think the resolution of the lens is a meaningful variable in your results, and I read the thesis of the article to be that, most of the time and for most of us, it isn't. Especially when you're comparing competent modern lens designs in something reasonably close to apples-to-apples.

    I'd tend to agree. I've taken plenty of bad photographs; sometimes they're technical failures of exposure or focus, sometimes they're compositionally terrible, sometimes there's the proverbial tree growing out of the subject's head. I can't think of a time when the problem with one of them has been "not enough lens resolution", though.

    To be fair, that may just mean I'm not good enough at the *other* things for resolution to become a limiting factor.

    -NT
    Nathan Tenny
    San Diego, CA, USA

    The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
    -The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_

  5. #25
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,492
    Images
    299
    Lens resolution is so far down the list of things I care about that it doesn't even register.
    I'd have to become a much better photographer first to do my crappy lenses justice...

    Some people really get into test charts and data. I'm sure at 20X one can easily see a difference. But I still don't care. Photography is too much about expressing an emotion for me to have time and patience to even worry about technical stuff.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  6. #26
    yurisrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New York Metro Area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    260
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
    Lens resolution is so far down the list of things I care about that it doesn't even register.
    I'd have to become a much better photographer first to do my crappy lenses justice... ...
    same here. Hopefully I can reach that point at some point in my lifetime. The only exceptions, are, naturally, unless your a Kubrick-type and need to go to NASA to get your Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm f/0.7 to film in candlelight. But, then again resolution wasn't the main concern for that picture-speed was. In my opinion, photography is all about orchestrating many variables (including lens type, processing, and so on) to be able to communicate effectively (and emotionally) with your intended audience.
    "The real work was thinking, just thinking." - Charles Chaplin

  7. #27
    Bruce Robbins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Carnoustie, Scotland
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Newt_on_Swings View Post
    Pointless article, and not even proof read (unless he really did shoot 400 speed film the odd film speed of 40). The macro lens is specialized for macro why shoot at infinity for comparison?
    No typo. The film is Firstcall 400S (same as Rollei Retro 400S) and it's rated at 40 ISO for development in Spur's HRX and Acurol-N. The macro lens has a stellar reputation outwith it's close-focusing range. Mike Johnston said this about it, "Here's one lens that's utterly forgotten yet absolutely magnificent: the Olympus Zuiko 50mm f/2 Macro. You can use it as a normal lens and I promise you, you will never use a better 50mm. No matter what name is engraved on the barrel." You can read the whole article here but be warned that you might find it a bit pointless, too.

    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/co...02-09-22.shtml
    The Online Darkroom
    www.theonlinedarkroom.com

  8. #28
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,392
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    Lens manufactures release resolution data on their lenses. If I am going to spend my hard earned money then I want to make the best decision. Published lens resolution charts give the buyer that information.
    There can be problems here. few years ago in the 1980's Hoya released a series of lenses Multi-coated some fixed FL others zooms, Under test they had excellent resolution so you'd assume good information for buyer,

    No so, resolution is only part of the issue, more practical tests are also needed to get a balanced overview. The Hoya range was extremely prone to flare the Multi-coating wasn't to every air/glass surface. Hoya quietly ceased making the range and went back to the drawing board, they released a completely new range of lenses under their Tokina brand name.

    My experience which I guess most here would agree with is that the standard lenses from all the larger manufacturers are all capable of producing high quality results and I found no noticeable differences between early 55mm Takumars and later Multi-coated 50/55mm Pentax lenses, nuances at wider apertures.

    So when selecting a lens a balanced approach that combines resolution testing an practical field testing is the most reliable. Bruce's practical approach is a valid opinion because he's using high quality lenses from 2 manufacturers who have an excellent reputation for their lens quality.

    Ian

  9. #29
    Newt_on_Swings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,002
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Robbins View Post
    No typo. The film is Firstcall 400S (same as Rollei Retro 400S) and it's rated at 40 ISO for development in Spur's HRX and Acurol-N. The macro lens has a stellar reputation outwith it's close-focusing range. Mike Johnston said this about it, "Here's one lens that's utterly forgotten yet absolutely magnificent: the Olympus Zuiko 50mm f/2 Macro. You can use it as a normal lens and I promise you, you will never use a better 50mm. No matter what name is engraved on the barrel." You can read the whole article here but be warned that you might find it a bit pointless, too.

    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/co...02-09-22.shtml
    Man I had to google the film and dev and came back full circle to that website. What a whacky combo with such a pull. I take back my comment on the proof reading, I should have google researched it a bit before posting. Thanks

  10. #30

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    460
    Images
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
    Lens resolution is so far down the list of things I care about that it doesn't even register.
    I'd have to become a much better photographer first to do my crappy lenses justice...
    Yes and no. For some images, resolution is important. It may however not be the kind of image that you would make. So your statement may be perfectly accurate for you, but for someone else it may be top of the list.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
    Some people really get into test charts and data. I'm sure at 20X one can easily see a difference. But I still don't care. Photography is too much about expressing an emotion for me to have time and patience to even worry about technical stuff.
    Having used an enormous array of Nikkor and Nikon-mount lenses, the good lenses do tend to stand out over many images and many hours of use. Not every single image and not every single circumstance, but on average, it is much more pleasant to use superb rather than mediocre lenses, both in optics and handling. If you have gear confidence, it frees you to think about the task or motive. There are many other facets that are arguably more important, so that whatever I spend has to be within the context of what improves my photography the most, for example workshops to acquire and hone skills, and trips to good destinations. I don't object to clinical gear comparisons, as they have their uses, but I do object to pretentious babbling about whether gear discussions are prudent or not. It leads nowhere.

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin