Bravo, Alan!
You know, I don't ever recall much discussion about lens tests when
I was doing photography many years ago. While sometimes the
qualities of one lens or another was discussed, it seemed that most
photographers just used lenses they liked for whatever reasons they
had. They made photographs and they were happy. Now, it seems,
times have changed. More people seem to make their choices of photo
gear based on test results - which, in all cases, are interpretive
and far from perfect indicators of overall lens performance.
I made a decision to use Pentax gear because I liked the way the
cameras and the lenses felt. My girlfriend used Nikon gear because
she liked some of the features it offered. Some of her lenses were
excellent, and may have been "better" than some of my lenses.
Frankly, we didn't give a rat's ass - we just made photographs,
burned film, printed in the darkroom, and enjoyed ourselves.
I recall that Elliott Erwitt had one of his Leicas set up with an
older, "optically inferior" lens, because the lens was collapsible,
and allowed him to carry the camera more easily in his pockets. He
knew that if he couldn't easily carry the camera, he may not carry
it at all, and miss many photo opportunities.
So, while all of these people argue and discuss resolution,
contrast, lines per millimeter, and whether the A* this is better
than the FA that, others are out shooting with their plastic
"optical" lenses and are at least making photographs. Further, some
folks it seems are busy arguing about the quality of lenses they
don't even own, or may not have used.
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
There are no rules for good photographs,
there are only good photographs.
Alan Chan wrote:
>
> I am just an amateur who is not interested in test report (I used to read a
> lot though). I had the FA*85/1.4 and now have the FA77/1.8. For portraits, I
> have found the FA77/1.8 produces smoother and more natural results than the
> FA*85/1.4 which had serious "bright-ring" bokeh in some situations (So to
> the F*300/4.5). When talking about lens performance, I have found that most
> people would concern contrast and resolution mainly. When in fact,
> resolution and contrast alone do not determine the overal quality of any
> lens. A super sharp lens does not necessily produce better result. I think
> what I have tried to say is, sometimes, the naturalness of the result is
> just as important. And I don't know if any test would be able to evaluate
> this unique quality.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
