Is there a need for F1.4 lenses....

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
fferreres Veteran Member • Posts: 3,772
Re: Is there a need for F1.4 lenses....

sportyaccordy wrote:

DenImage wrote:

It's funny how you get "carpet bombed" for having an opinion that others disagree with. Unfortunately that's a sign of the times nowadays. Others feel the need to try to convert your opinion than respect your right to differ.

Personally, unless I ask someone for their opinion I'm not interested in debating mine.

However if someone expresses an opinion without substantiation, then they need to substantiate it when challenged. I think that's where the arguments start.

I love how people post "most people" do this or do that, when they wouldn't have a clue what "most people" do or think. Easy to counter with "how do you know what most people think?".


I'd wager he got carpet bombed for the manner and evidence he used to express said opinion. Plenty of people like slower lenses and ask for them all the time. The 35 1.8 was prob the #1 most requested lens here for a long time despite several 35 1.4s being available. Sometimes it's not a big conspiracy or societal decline... it's just you

Lol. Actually I dramatized a bit. It was a nice discussion with some good points. Main complain is that some thought the point was vague. Most people I know associate aperture with a spect that bigger is always better, and cost and weight. To summarize, there more than that: the designs possible, and therefore the outputs can be different. But usually a slower lens is understood a the poor man choice, because in the mayoritario of cases, that’s what thI y are. Lesser speced with worst characteristics at attractive prices.

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