Lens with "wow" effect !! :-))

Started Dec 4, 2012 | Discussions
Le Kilt
Senior MemberPosts: 1,673Gear list
Like?
Re: True, but…
In reply to Phil Hill, Dec 5, 2012

Phil Hill wrote:

yellodog wrote:

If you don't believe that deep down in side why don't you sell your MkIII and Canon lenses and buy a something for a 1/10 th of the price? The difference would be enough for some serious travelling.

What an absurd thing to say. Where is that coming from? I don’t know how you could possibly get that from any of my posts. Why not stick to photography instead of offering financial advice?

It’s true that I don’t believe in magical lenses that automatically deliver “wow” (which is all I was trying to say), but that doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate the benefits of quality gear.

For the record, my best lenses aren’t made by Canon, but when I manage to get one of those “wow” shots I believe it has more to do with knowing how to get the best a lens has to offer, rather than the lens itself.

By the way, I’ve seen plenty of “wow” photos taken by friends with the lowly kit lens. If that was all I could afford, I’m confident that I could make it work. I started out with much less.

I think you're missing the OP's point, this is about when the lens helps you get that extra something.  Like an ultra wide angle giving that extra perspective, an 85 f/1.2 giving a fabulous bokeh, a fast zoom with IS allowing you to get that sports shot with sharpness yet blurred background, a good tele that grabs that BIF with detail and sharpness...

The photographer makes the first difference, and the equipment the second one.

 Le Kilt's gear list:Le Kilt's gear list
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Le Kilt
Senior MemberPosts: 1,673Gear list
Like?
Some lenses...
In reply to gdanmitchell, Dec 5, 2012

gdanmitchell wrote:

Philippe R wrote:

Hi you all,

I have read a post on someone looking for a lens that produces a "wow" factor.....

So let's have it, what do you consider a lens with a definite "wow" effect

Please specify the lens, the body it's used on, and of course your use...

Include examples if you had some handy

I'll start, in my bag, the WOW effect, is had by :

the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II for sports

the EF 135mm f/2 L for portraits

the EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS for sports and wildlife

I use mainly now 1DX or 5D III

Cheers and looking forward to reading your posts !!!

Phil

-- hide signature --

Phil (Nice, FR)
www.pbase.com/webman06
www.eosdslr.com

Photographs and photographers produce "wow" effects. Lens just pass and focus light.

Dan

-

Some lenses pass light in a nicer way than others

Otherwise we'd all make do with a 35mm f 2.8, life would be so much simpler...

 Le Kilt's gear list:Le Kilt's gear list
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
driz
Regular MemberPosts: 168
Like?
Re: True, but…
In reply to Phil Hill, Dec 5, 2012

Phil Hill wrote:

It’s true that I don’t believe in magical lenses that automatically deliver “wow” (which is all I was trying to say), but that doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate the benefits of quality gear.

I missed the part of the original post where anyone said 'magical' lenses 'automatically' deliver wow.

I don't think anyone anywhere believes that.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Phil Hill
Senior MemberPosts: 2,622Gear list
Like?
Re: True, but…
In reply to driz, Dec 5, 2012

driz wrote:

Phil Hill wrote:

It’s true that I don’t believe in magical lenses that automatically deliver “wow” (which is all I was trying to say), but that doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate the benefits of quality gear.

I missed the part of the original post where anyone said 'magical' lenses 'automatically' deliver wow.

That was in response to the post just above mine, not the OP, that said:

“A skilled photographer with a Zeiss lens is going to get more wows per pic than the same photographer with a Praktica or a Kiev.”

But it’s becoming clear to me that OP didn’t mean “wow” in the same sense that I usually hear it, and I regret taking this thread off-track.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
foggy
Regular MemberPosts: 254Gear list
Like?
Re: Lens with "wow" effect !! :-))
In reply to Blastophaga, Dec 6, 2012

I've had primes it seems forever I started shooting in 1972. When I stepped up to a DSLR (20D) for me zooms had come so far in IQ that I bought as fast glass as I could afford in zooms. The sharpness color and clarity were very nice. Also that was my transition from film SLRs from the N camp and had been dealing with very slow AF So My experience with Canons to start was being wowed by the fast AF.

I have the

Tokina 12-24 F4 type I

Tami 28-75 F2.8

Canon 70-200 F4

Canon 400 F5.6

I now shoot a 60D (I just got the 400 6 months ago), I was looking to add a fast prime to my bag for low light and settled on the 85 1.8 for fast action indoors shooting children at play. I do enjoy portrait work at times and had been using the Tami at the far end for that. I have done really good work with the zoom but after around a decade of no prime in this range I was really WOWed at the IQ, sharpness close to wide open, fit, balance, bokeh, color of this prime. If I did portraits for a living I would have to think about the 85 1.2 II but at the cost, the business would have to support it. Saying that the one thing I was put off by was the AF speed for what I do on the 1.2. With the 85 1.8 I know the 1.2 can best it in all but AF but at 5 times the cost and from the photos I've seen you would be hard pressed to tell what lens shot the image with no data to show which lens. I know it’s looking at the glass half full or half empty and some would not think of owning anything but an L. But for me I get visions of the $2000 toilet seat when I think of the 85 1.2. With the 85 1.8 there is enough there so with craft and technique I could come away with the better image.

So WOW factor yes for all you get in a well made lens for around $359.00 the price of say a 28-135 IS kit zoom. I would also like the 135 F2 L and it's sharper too..! Now I have to take my hat off to the guys that have been saying the primes are better it's been a pleasant wake up..!

Foggy

 foggy's gear list:foggy's gear list
Canon EOS 60D Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Tokina AT-X Pro 12-24mm f/4 (IF) DX +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
gdanmitchell
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,730
Like?
Re: Lens with "wow" effect !! :-))
In reply to Bassman2003, Dec 6, 2012

Bassman2003 wrote:

The OP is probably aware that photographers make photos etc... There are lenses that just make you go "Wow" looking at images. As much as some folks want to deny it, there is a reason why some lenses cost more. If I am going to attempt to represent professional quality, I want to be using one of those lenses. I want the equipment to match the effort.

No, that is where I fundamentally have to disagree with you. Lenses can be good, bad, or indifferent, but I have never seen a photograph where the lens made me say wow. I've seen lots of photographs, made with an incredible range of photographic equipment that did make me say wow or something similar, including work done with just about every kind of camera gear imaginable.

I'm not suggesting that decent gear is unimportant nor that all gear works the same - not that there are not reasons for price differences among lenses. What I am saying - emphatically - that you cannot create a wow effect (whatever that is) in a photograph by choosing to use some particular lens - any more that you can elicit a wow response to your cooking by using really, really cool cookware - or that you'll get a wow response to your skiing by using the world's most expensive skis.

If you aspire to eliciting a wow from your viewers and you are hoping to get their by choosing some particular lens, you are on the wrong track entirely.

For the record, I own good lenses, some of which might even make it onto the lists of so-called wow lenses. But I don't view them that way at all. They are appropriate tools for the photography I do and that is all.

Dan

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CrapCamera
Regular MemberPosts: 139Gear list
Like?
Re: Lens with "wow" effect !! :-))
In reply to Philippe R, Dec 6, 2012

"Zeiss 50MM F2 Makro-Planar ZE"

"Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM"

Definitely want the  "Zeiss 100MM F2 Makro-Planar ZE" and the "Zeiss 25mm f/2 Distagon"

Zeiss lenses really are magic.

 CrapCamera's gear list:CrapCamera's gear list
Canon PowerShot S80 Canon PowerShot S95 Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
gdanmitchell
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,730
Like?
Re: Lens with "wow" effect !! :-))
In reply to CrapCamera, Dec 6, 2012

CrapCamera wrote:

Zeiss lenses really are magic.

Sigh. That's what the mythologists would like you to believe. Zeiss lenses are very good, as are a number of lenses from other manufacturers including Canon.

These are nice photographs, but there is nothing in them that reflects that supposed "magic" of the lenses that were used to make them. One could fake up a "Zeiss" lens by putting Zeiss branding on some lens made by someone else, and those who judge lenses by the brand name would swear up and down that the lens was magical.

Double-sigh...

Dan

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Collett
Senior MemberPosts: 5,000
Like?
Re: Lens with "wow" effect !! :-))
In reply to Philippe R, Dec 6, 2012

Philippe R wrote:

Hi you all,

I have read a post on someone looking for a lens that produces a "wow" factor.....

So let's have it, what do you consider a lens with a definite "wow" effect

Please specify the lens, the body it's used on, and of course your use...

Include examples if you had some handy

I'll start, in my bag, the WOW effect, is had by :

the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II for sports

the EF 135mm f/2 L for portraits

the EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS for sports and wildlife

I use mainly now 1DX or 5D III

Cheers and looking forward to reading your posts !!!

Phil

-- hide signature --

Phil (Nice, FR)
www.pbase.com/webman06
www.eosdslr.com

I agree with the comments that a skilled photographer can produce 'Wow' images with just about any lens.

That said, my personal preference gravitates toward fast primes with shallow DOF and beautiful bokeh. Of the lenses I own, the 50L and 135L do it for me. The 70-200F2.8ISvII is pretty darn sweet also. In contrast, my very fine Zeiss 28F2 just does not 'do it' for me personally. Aparently, I am not the kinda of person that will go ga ga over technical perfection and corner sharpness - but I do go ga ga over bokeh and shallow DOF. I appreciate that my taste are not for everyone, but hey its my hobby so I might as well shoot what is asthetically pleasing to me right

-- hide signature --

Jim

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Schwany
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,684Gear list
Like?
Is one man's wow another man's bow wow?
In reply to Philippe R, Dec 6, 2012

As far as I'm concerned, any lens on the camera I have in my hands is a lens capable of a wow effect. It's my job to tickle the wow out of it. But, is my wow, your bow wow?

Images that evoke a strong emotional response are also wow images in my opinion. Such images could be captured with an iPhone if one is in the right place at the right time. Just saying

 Schwany's gear list:Schwany's gear list
Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS-1D X Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM +14 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nelsonal
Senior MemberPosts: 2,460Gear list
Like?
Re: Lens with "wow" effect !! :-))
In reply to gdanmitchell, Dec 6, 2012

gdanmitchell wrote:

One could fake up a "Zeiss" lens by putting Zeiss branding on some lens made by someone else, and those who judge lenses by the brand name would swear up and down that the lens was magical.

In the only test of anything like that I've seen, 75% could tell Zeiss from Canon:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1002900

Web resolution images, 9 different lenses. Images are still on the first page, results are currently on the last page. I'd be curious to see how your test goes.

I don't think this means either are "magic" but I think it's pretty clear both brands have different rendering styles that photographers were able to notice.  One can take those cues and use them as they please.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Great Bustard
Forum ProPosts: 24,681
Like?
Whatever lens the "wow photographer" is using. (nt)
In reply to Philippe R, Dec 7, 2012

Philippe R wrote:

Hi you all,

I have read a post on someone looking for a lens that produces a "wow" factor.....

So let's have it, what do you consider a lens with a definite "wow" effect

Please specify the lens, the body it's used on, and of course your use...

Include examples if you had some handy

I'll start, in my bag, the WOW effect, is had by :

the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II for sports

the EF 135mm f/2 L for portraits

the EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS for sports and wildlife

I use mainly now 1DX or 5D III

Cheers and looking forward to reading your posts !!!

Phil

-- hide signature --

Phil (Nice, FR)
www.pbase.com/webman06
www.eosdslr.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
gdanmitchell
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,730
Like?
Re: Lens with "wow" effect !! :-))
In reply to nelsonal, Dec 7, 2012

nelsonal wrote:

gdanmitchell wrote:

One could fake up a "Zeiss" lens by putting Zeiss branding on some lens made by someone else, and those who judge lenses by the brand name would swear up and down that the lens was magical.

In the only test of anything like that I've seen, 75% could tell Zeiss from Canon:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1002900

Web resolution images, 9 different lenses. Images are still on the first page, results are currently on the last page. I'd be curious to see how your test goes.

I don't think this means either are "magic" but I think it's pretty clear both brands have different rendering styles that photographers were able to notice. One can take those cues and use them as they please.

LENSES have different combinations of sharpness patterns (center versus corner, etc.), contrast, halation, and so forth - so it is no surprise at all that when presented with unaltered images from various lenses people can see that they are different.

I can see differences among my 17-40, 24-105, and 24mm f/1.4 L lenses at 24mm. I can see differences among my 70-200mm, 135mm f/2, and 100-400mm lenses at 135mm. Some key points:

  • None of these excellent lenses are "magical" or have some objective characteristic that might be described as "wow" quotient.
  • Depending upon the subject and shooting situation I might choose any of lens among each of the sets to shoot something at those two focal lengths.
  • I can produce photographs that have what might be characterized as a "wow" effect - people love them, and even purchase them - with any of these lenses.
I'm not sure why you felt the need to point out the obvious fact that lenses do not perform in identical ways and that the differences in the ways they perform can be seen in some cases. That wasn't the underlying assumption of this thread at all, and I never challenged that fact at all.
Dan
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nelsonal
Senior MemberPosts: 2,460Gear list
Like?
Re: Lens with "wow" effect !! :-))
In reply to gdanmitchell, Dec 7, 2012

gdanmitchell wrote:

nelsonal wrote:

gdanmitchell wrote:

One could fake up a "Zeiss" lens by putting Zeiss branding on some lens made by someone else, and those who judge lenses by the brand name would swear up and down that the lens was magical.

In the only test of anything like that I've seen, 75% could tell Zeiss from Canon:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1002900

Web resolution images, 9 different lenses. Images are still on the first page, results are currently on the last page. I'd be curious to see how your test goes.

I don't think this means either are "magic" but I think it's pretty clear both brands have different rendering styles that photographers were able to notice. One can take those cues and use them as they please.

LENSES have different combinations of sharpness patterns (center versus corner, etc.), contrast, halation, and so forth - so it is no surprise at all that when presented with unaltered images from various lenses people can see that they are different.

I can see differences among my 17-40, 24-105, and 24mm f/1.4 L lenses at 24mm. I can see differences among my 70-200mm, 135mm f/2, and 100-400mm lenses at 135mm. Some key points:

  • None of these excellent lenses are "magical" or have some objective characteristic that might be described as "wow" quotient.
  • Depending upon the subject and shooting situation I might choose any of lens among each of the sets to shoot something at those two focal lengths.
  • I can produce photographs that have what might be characterized as a "wow" effect - people love them, and even purchase them - with any of these lenses.
I'm not sure why you felt the need to point out the obvious fact that lenses do not perform in identical ways and that the differences in the ways they perform can be seen in some cases. That wasn't the underlying assumption of this thread at all, and I never challenged that fact at all.

That 3/4 of photographers can spot the Zeiss in a blind test, suggests that most will also be able to spot a fake "Zeiss" you proposed. That doesn't make Zeiss, Canon, nor any other brand magical but it suggests "putting Zeiss branding on some lens made by someone else" would be both spotted as different fairly quickly and wouldn't have many users singing the magical praises for long either.

Personally, if there's an advantage to any brand of lenses, I think it's mostly in the quality control department.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Press Correspondent
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,344Gear list
Like?
Misunderstood
In reply to Philippe R, Dec 7, 2012

It looks like "wow" has  pushed the sensitive button. So many good people here did not understand that the question was about lenses, not about photographers. If you simply asked, "What are your favorite lenses?", everyone would be fine answering instead of fighting it.

 Press Correspondent's gear list:Press Correspondent's gear list
Olympus XZ-1 Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bassman2003
Contributing MemberPosts: 669
Like?
Re: Lens with "wow" effect !! :-))
In reply to gdanmitchell, Dec 7, 2012

gdanmitchell wrote:

Bassman2003 wrote:

The OP is probably aware that photographers make photos etc... There are lenses that just make you go "Wow" looking at images. As much as some folks want to deny it, there is a reason why some lenses cost more. If I am going to attempt to represent professional quality, I want to be using one of those lenses. I want the equipment to match the effort.

No, that is where I fundamentally have to disagree with you. Lenses can be good, bad, or indifferent, but I have never seen a photograph where the lens made me say wow. I've seen lots of photographs, made with an incredible range of photographic equipment that did make me say wow or something similar, including work done with just about every kind of camera gear imaginable.

I'm not suggesting that decent gear is unimportant nor that all gear works the same - not that there are not reasons for price differences among lenses. What I am saying - emphatically - that you cannot create a wow effect (whatever that is) in a photograph by choosing to use some particular lens - any more that you can elicit a wow response to your cooking by using really, really cool cookware - or that you'll get a wow response to your skiing by using the world's most expensive skis.

If you aspire to eliciting a wow from your viewers and you are hoping to get their by choosing some particular lens, you are on the wrong track entirely.

For the record, I own good lenses, some of which might even make it onto the lists of so-called wow lenses. But I don't view them that way at all. They are appropriate tools for the photography I do and that is all.

Dan

No worries but I think you are arguing a point that nobody is disputing here.  As just posted, the term WOW has hit a sensitive button.  The age old equipment vs talent battle has shown up even when it is not needed.

The point of this thread is if you took the same photograph or scene with different lenses, which ones would make you go "wow" with the captured image?  Simple concept and nothing to do with photographers.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Philippe R
Contributing MemberPosts: 856Gear list
Like?
Re: Misunderstood
In reply to Press Correspondent, Dec 7, 2012

Press Correspondent wrote:

It looks like "wow" has pushed the sensitive button. So many good people here did not understand that the question was about lenses, not about photographers. If you simply asked, "What are your favorite lenses?", everyone would be fine answering instead of fighting it.

I second that.

By that post, i surely didn't expect that flaming debate between some of you photographers.
Lens are tools that can craft the light to produce images, however pleasing...

Some lens are sweeter than others, and i just wanted people to share their sweeter lens selection !!!

So lets have it, people :-)))

Cheers

-- hide signature --

Phil (Nice, FR)
www.pbase.com/webman06
www.eosdslr.com

 Philippe R's gear list:Philippe R's gear list
Canon PowerShot G10 Fujifilm X100S Canon EOS 30D Canon EOS 350D Canon EOS-1D X +45 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
gdanmitchell
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,730
Like?
Re: Lens with "wow" effect !! :-))
In reply to Bassman2003, Dec 7, 2012

Bassman2003 wrote:

gdanmitchell wrote:

Bassman2003 wrote:

The OP is probably aware that photographers make photos etc... There are lenses that just make you go "Wow" looking at images. As much as some folks want to deny it, there is a reason why some lenses cost more. If I am going to attempt to represent professional quality, I want to be using one of those lenses. I want the equipment to match the effort.

No, that is where I fundamentally have to disagree with you. Lenses can be good, bad, or indifferent, but I have never seen a photograph where the lens made me say wow. I've seen lots of photographs, made with an incredible range of photographic equipment that did make me say wow or something similar, including work done with just about every kind of camera gear imaginable.

I'm not suggesting that decent gear is unimportant nor that all gear works the same - not that there are not reasons for price differences among lenses. What I am saying - emphatically - that you cannot create a wow effect (whatever that is) in a photograph by choosing to use some particular lens - any more that you can elicit a wow response to your cooking by using really, really cool cookware - or that you'll get a wow response to your skiing by using the world's most expensive skis.

If you aspire to eliciting a wow from your viewers and you are hoping to get their by choosing some particular lens, you are on the wrong track entirely.

For the record, I own good lenses, some of which might even make it onto the lists of so-called wow lenses. But I don't view them that way at all. They are appropriate tools for the photography I do and that is all.

Dan

No worries but I think you are arguing a point that nobody is disputing here. As just posted, the term WOW has hit a sensitive button. The age old equipment vs talent battle has shown up even when it is not needed.

The point of this thread is if you took the same photograph or scene with different lenses, which ones would make you go "wow" with the captured image? Simple concept and nothing to do with photographers.

And the answer is that no particular lens will make anyone say "wow" when they look at a photograph.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Schwany
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,684Gear list
Like?
I think everyone got it
In reply to Philippe R, Dec 7, 2012

Philippe R wrote:

Press Correspondent wrote:

It looks like "wow" has pushed the sensitive button. So many good people here did not understand that the question was about lenses, not about photographers. If you simply asked, "What are your favorite lenses?", everyone would be fine answering instead of fighting it.

I second that.

By that post, i surely didn't expect that flaming debate between some of you photographers.
Lens are tools that can craft the light to produce images, however pleasing...

Some lens are sweeter than others, and i just wanted people to share their sweeter lens selection !!!

So lets have it, people :-)))


Everyone gets it, but some have agendas and a script they must stick to. snicker

I've got all your sweetness listed in the first post and a lot more. Sometimes they are wow, sometimes not. Nothing to get excited about really. Speaking of tools, I can't remember the last time I gushed about my favorite hammer.

 Schwany's gear list:Schwany's gear list
Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS-1D X Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM +14 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nelsonal
Senior MemberPosts: 2,460Gear list
Like?
Re: I think everyone got it
In reply to Schwany, Dec 7, 2012

I know it's the sterotype around here, but the folks who use them daily argue about which hammers are best too, though not as often as other tools:

http://www.contractortalk.com/f40/best-framing-hammer-113310/

http://forums2.gardenweb.com/forums/load/tools/msg1212051122412.html

http://www.contractortalk.com/f40/what-brand-cordless-tools-should-i-buy-hilti-makita-dewalt-99721/

Look familiar?  Just about every stereotypical men's activity has ongoing debate over the best tools and usually a secondary debate over skill vs tool quality.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads