Particular
a.k.a. CNNY, disassembler
I went around a couple of commercial galleries the other day looking at prints. At 6ft they all looked like pretty slick prints, but at 2ft, most just looked god awful. They were almost all printed much too large for the detail in the image. They would have looked great on the internet.
Good equipment doesn't necessarily make your images better, but crappy equipment sure can make them worse.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Because owning a Summilux is about the ownership, at least as much as it is about pictures.
Owning a Canonet will not give you the same sense of achievement and owner's pride that owning a Summilux will.
Joe's entry remarks are completely to the point, but they won't stop anyone here from buying yet another lens, no matter how they agree "in principle".
Brian Legge
Veteran
Then again, its hard to do with a f/3.5 lens what you can do with an f/0.95 lens. 
FrankS
Registered User
Then again, its hard to do with a f/3.5 lens what you can do with an f/0.95 lens.
Only at apertures bigger than f3.5 though.
pggunn
gregor
Most of us enjoy equipment and acquiring it. We all get GAS at some time or another - otherwise we wouldn't have any (equipment that is) - but ultimately it doesn't make a difference.
My best pictures come when I forget about the equipment and get in what I call the zone - almost a zen like state where I'm totally focused on the shot, on the subject, and being in the moment. When I do manage to get in that zone, I'm not very conscious of the equipment I'm using or even the passage of time for that matter, and I get into that state whether I'm using my OM, a rangefinder, a DSLR, or a simple point and shoot camera.
When I am struggling with my photography it's because I'm not engaged enough in the subject, not because of the equipment.
My best pictures come when I forget about the equipment and get in what I call the zone - almost a zen like state where I'm totally focused on the shot, on the subject, and being in the moment. When I do manage to get in that zone, I'm not very conscious of the equipment I'm using or even the passage of time for that matter, and I get into that state whether I'm using my OM, a rangefinder, a DSLR, or a simple point and shoot camera.
When I am struggling with my photography it's because I'm not engaged enough in the subject, not because of the equipment.
JayM
Well-known
Then again, its hard to do with a f/3.5 lens what you can do with an f/0.95 lens.
You know, I wish I saw more good pictures taken with fast lenses that were used for shooting in low light rather than the neo-pictorialist bokeh fest that seems so common with anything faster than f/2. I know it exists, I just find this hard to swallow when most of the online examples of what you can do with fast lenses amount to "look how much bokeh I just bought."
Also, I think the only way that photography is possibly easier to establish "competence" in is if you consider competence as the ability to somewhat regularly create somewhat properly exposed photographs. I can have a blast putting graphite on paper, paint on canvas, or playing with clay but I don't think anyone would describe me as "competent" for doing so. I know what all the keys on my accordion do and can read sheet music too. Being able to press a button is not "competence."
Last edited:
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
I highlighted the key words for you.
I think the last few lens quizzes here have shown quite convincingly that you can't distinguish between expensive and less expensive lenses in a 720x480 shot, and if you can, it's not on "quality".
A print is another matter, but ask any M9 owner here how often they print their digital shots at 20x30 or larger where the differences would become visible - not that they'd matter much then, either, from an artistic value point of view.
Quality often is not the reason, it's the rationalization for owning expensive gear. The reason is often pride of ownership, GAS, and peer pressure as in being talked into buying things by people owning these things already.
FrankS
Registered User
Camera gear that is right for you, and the task at hand, gets out of the way, becomes transparent, and allows one to concentrate on the photography process.
Last edited:
SciAggie
Well-known
Joe, my answer to your question is essentially no - it doesn't matter - with a couple a caveats. I agree that expensive lenses don't necessarily make your pictures great, but crappy lenses can make them worse. That said, few of us shoot crappy lenses.
I also shoot the majority of my images a f2 - f8. In that range I believe most lenses perform well. I do have several lenses that in my mind impart special qualities to an image. My Canon 85/1.2L is a very special lens. I also use my Canon 0.95 and 1.2 when I want their unique qualities. The same for the Leica 50/1. The thing is, I don't carry these lenses often, just for very pre-visualized photos.
For most of my pics, if I do my job well, no one would know if it was shot with a Leica, Canon, Pentax, or Nikon lens.
I also shoot the majority of my images a f2 - f8. In that range I believe most lenses perform well. I do have several lenses that in my mind impart special qualities to an image. My Canon 85/1.2L is a very special lens. I also use my Canon 0.95 and 1.2 when I want their unique qualities. The same for the Leica 50/1. The thing is, I don't carry these lenses often, just for very pre-visualized photos.
For most of my pics, if I do my job well, no one would know if it was shot with a Leica, Canon, Pentax, or Nikon lens.
pggunn
gregor
Well said.
DamenS
Well-known
Nope, not really ... and the price difference between a Nikon 50mm f1.4 and a Leica 50mm Summilux buys a LOT of film, developing, other lenses, field trips etc.
Of course, a difference in physical attributes such as maximum apertures matters a lot if you need faster apertures, or AF if you need it etc, but actual "quality" differences are minimal for most people most of the time.
Of course, a difference in physical attributes such as maximum apertures matters a lot if you need faster apertures, or AF if you need it etc, but actual "quality" differences are minimal for most people most of the time.
The Dark
Established
There's people who shoots with a Holga and makes artwork and there's who shoots with a M9 and makes crap.
It's clear enough that what you shoot with does not matter. It Ideas, vision and effort that make the difference.
It's clear enough that what you shoot with does not matter. It Ideas, vision and effort that make the difference.
shiro_kuro
Charles Bowen
This is in regards to music but may also apply to photography as well as other things ....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_7DgCrziI8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_7DgCrziI8
randolph45
Well-known
nice stuff
nice stuff
I have got some nice stuff to play with,but in my case the end results would probably be the same as my signature at the bottom says
nice stuff
I have got some nice stuff to play with,but in my case the end results would probably be the same as my signature at the bottom says
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
It obviously matters to some people or Leica wouldn't be selling five thousand dollar + lenses as fast as they can make them. Or maybe the buyers buy them just because they can ... surely not!
redisburning
Well-known
wow, thank you very much for posting that.
I am young. and I am inexperienced in photography. I want very much to buy the best gear I can afford because to me it gets out of the way of what Im trying to do better.
I don't see blurry in my mind, though my eyes might. Sometimes I see in dreamy pastels and other times vivid colors and sometimes only black and white. That is why I am always so torn between what film to buy but never which film to use on a certain day.
I do not believe better gear will make me a better photographer. I believe it will allow me to be one, though.
I have something like 5 computer mice. Mostly because I played counterstrike. Never did a mouse make me better. But for certain once I found a mouse I could get along with I got better. Gradually. But faster, and to a higher level than I could have with a 2 dollar walmart wireless.
Just my 2c.
FrankS
Registered User
Clearly the limiting factor in the quality of my images is my own skills, and not the quality of my photo gear. I'm okay with that - I want to work on improving my skills; that is the purpose of this hobby of mine. Where I would become frustrated, is if the limiting factor in the quality of my images were my photo gear.
hteasley
Pupil
Marginal quality improvements are always the most expensive. Given that most lenses available are basically fine, the strata of "poor" to "excellent" are very fine, and somewhat subjective. Even quality is subjective: "character" is all about deviation and imperfection. It's why Holgas are interesting, and people pay for apps like Hipstamatic to mess up their iPhone camera photos.
Haigh
Gary Haigh
why do we care so much?
In general I don't care what I use as long as I get a nice shot. The best colour images of Venice that I have seen were taken by a pro using an early model Sony cybershot ( about 5mp I think ).
In general I don't care what I use as long as I get a nice shot. The best colour images of Venice that I have seen were taken by a pro using an early model Sony cybershot ( about 5mp I think ).
noimmunity
scratch my niche
Don't underestimate the power of the image
Don't underestimate the power of the image
It's not just the ends, but also the means, that counts.
For pros, there is always the question of reliability, both in terms of the image produced and the ability to produce it on demand; for amateurs, there is that of enjoyment, not just in seeing the final product, but also in using the equipment to get there.
And since it all concerns image, photographers of all ilks care about how they look in the process.
Don't underestimate the power of the image
It's not just the ends, but also the means, that counts.
For pros, there is always the question of reliability, both in terms of the image produced and the ability to produce it on demand; for amateurs, there is that of enjoyment, not just in seeing the final product, but also in using the equipment to get there.
And since it all concerns image, photographers of all ilks care about how they look in the process.