OK (but borderline hateful) kit lens

sportyaccordy wrote:

KEG wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

KEG wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

KEG wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

KEG wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

KEG wrote:

Canon knows that optimizing for cornersharpness is optimizing for something which almost never happens in real life

Yea landscape photography is def not a thing

Just one question, you personally bring a ladder to your landscape shots? I am 180 cm or about 5ft11" and I have a near constant experience of whatever is in the corners being out of focus due to the near limit of DOF and that is primarily because the ground in front of me is not flat and not sloping away from me.

Don't know what kind of landscapes you shoot but I generally shoot landscapes with DoF as deep as possible. Whether the ground slopes is irrelevant. Stuff like mountains and trees are high off the ground

Could you kindly post a landscape where the corners mattered?

I can't.... you have decided that corners don't matter to everybody, so no such picture exists.

that is not what I am claiming, I am contending that due to us living in a 3D space there is a high likelihood that there is something in the corners closer than the near limit when shooting outside at normal human height.

Those things won't ever be in focus due to physics regardless if you are using $3000 L lens or not.

Perhaps in the lower corners but not the higher ones. And depending on where and what you're shooting all the corners may have subjects well beyond the hyperfocal distance. I think these photos illustrate my point:

Not entirely sure what your goals where but you managed to find a Sony lens which makes the 24-105 stm look like a L in comparision.

Irony of this quip is that all of these shots were taken with an adapted Canon 17-40 F4L

Better start defending it now

More evidence that the photographer takes bad pictures and not the gear.  😉

Low hanging fruit.  Just messing. 😁