Any three lenses (but only three)

Started 1 month ago | Discussions thread
Contributing MemberPosts: 913
Re: Any three lenses (but only three)
In reply to Tuanglen, 1 month ago

Is not photography such an aggressive sport? After all, how very many photographers "capture" and "shoot" things. They imprison temporal (and spatial) slices of reality within a rectangular prison, where, like an animal in a zoo, that slice of reality, no matter how ill-conceived, must live out its days. That this prison--the photograph's habitat, if you will--might be too small, too cold, or too blasé is hardly of import. All that matters to this ilk is that this exotic "animal" was bagged...with the longest, widest, or sharpest "gun." Yes, superzoom aficionados and prime sharpness whores, I'm talking about you.

In regard to this thread (and in particular, its convenience sampling), few things exert more of a monopoly on apocrypha than the hypothetical: what people think they want might hardly be what they need. After all, how many poles does a blind man need to see? One? Two? Three? Will he who needs to see with new eyes come to see better with new glass?

You ask what three lenses we might wish to have. I'd rather have only one lens and see well with it than all the glass in the world and be blind. And no amount of corrective eyewear can fix cortical blindness.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow