Do we still "need" fast lenses ?

Started 6 months ago | Discussions thread
nigelht Senior Member • Posts: 1,861
Re: Do we still "need" fast lenses ?

vyoufinder wrote:

primeshooter wrote:

vyoufinder wrote:

primeshooter wrote:

vyoufinder wrote:

You pretty much nailed it. The only real reason for fast lenses nowadays is bokeh isolation. A secondary reason could be for opening up brighter on dSLR's to help see. For any other purpose, you generally get better image quality with a slower lens which has fewer/thinner glass elements inside.

And when you are shooting a moving subject in lower light and are unable to use flash, sports, wedding...please explain how a slow aperture and vr would help and why "they are just for bokeh".

Not the same picture. I would not adjust my aperture based on the amount of light, I'd adjust my ISO or film speed. Adjusting aperture is more like a desperate measure to get something at all, but isn't the same as having a subject entirely in focus. It's kind of the point of the OP is that there is no need to get desperate with opening up beyond what you want to with a modern camera.

The ability to open up and isolate something is a great tool, but it's not for every picture and is not the only reason for a full frame camera.

Raising iso lowers IQ much faster than my idea.

Your idea doesn't produce the same image. It's irrelevant. IF it were relevant, I would also argure that, no, it doesn't. The difference between f1.2 and f4 is as different as apples and oranges whereas iso 100 vs. iso 1200 is almost unnoticeable. I'll re-iterate though, it's not a matter of image quality, it's a matter of a different image entirely. One has depth of field and sharp focus while the other will not.

Right.  You're going to shoot ISO 100, 1/1000, f4 in poorly lit high school gyms when folks are shooting ISO 6400, 1/500, f2.8 in the same conditions.

There's a marked difference in IQ between 6400 and 51,200 on many cameras.

The idea that you can just push ISO comes from folks that don't shoot action in low light while already near the end of the natural ISO range of the camera.  Why do people always pick ISO 100 when sports shooters are often ecstatic at ISO 1600, satisfied at 3200 and all too often at 6400? aren't making much sense here...

I'm making perfect sense, whether or not you understand is another matter.

fast glass isn't just for bokeh. What you have wrote in this post is just ridiculous.

Wrong again.

You wrote and I quote: The only real reason for fast lenses nowadays is bokeh isolation.

Finally we can agree.

I just showed you that this is indeed not the case.

No, you didn't. Show me another reason if you can that I need my fast lenses. I don't.

Because YOU don't then nobody does eh?  No, it's not just for "bokeh isolation" even with "modern cameras" or we wouldn't pay $6K for a 300mm f2.8.

 nigelht's gear list:nigelht's gear list
Nikon 1 V2 Nikon D5300
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow