danijel973 wrote:
Yes, there are those who can't afford the more expensive stuff and have to rationalize things, but in photography, the price of equipment only rarely really influences the results, and only before a very low financial threshold; one could buy a film camera and a cheap 50mm lens and perform photographic miracles, so envy due to lack of money isn't really a photography thing, it's more a social network pecking order thing.
V. true, but the corollary is that you cannot establish ANY pecking order with the lenses you own.
Shall we state again that HCB used only one lens most of his life? Subject Isolation and sharpness were never concerns of his.
They are not in many genres: PJ, Street, Landscape - that is where maximum DOF is needed, and SKILL of course.
Suburban consumerists instead try to peddle the commonplace of Subject Isolation as if it were Salvation itself, whereas it's just an old, worn out device used by the lamest commercial photogs. No great art to isolate an eye - a piece of software can do that.
But then OC it shows that you spent thousands on a lens even if you'll use it once in a lifetime.
We all know that some improvement in gear can stimulate a languishing interest SOMETIMES.
To me ultrafast AF did but f/1.4 or 1.8 lenses never did, and LensRentals vindicates that showing that at those ranges resolution is poor, and that is almost the double at f/2.8, where much cheaper lenses perform equally well.
So a Scandal follows - LOL. Never mention to Middletown that people wasted their money, they never knew the fundamentals, perhaps they never knew what kind of system they were buying in.
Refreshingly both Cicala and Hogan draw some conclusion about the strengths of the m4/3 system that noobs would do well to meditate upon, before complaining that their pecking order has been upset.
You can have fantastic good performance with small wides like the P 14/2.5 spending v. little by now. That is one strengths of the system. On longer focals one would do well to avoid SW correction if one wants good edges. Having telecentric lenses helps. You'll probably never get great results below f/2. So why don't you throw your system to the dogs, and start again with another one?
Am.
