biza43
Forum Pro
Take photos.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
if you could have an optically perfect lens kit and unlimited resolution - then what ?
- Thread starter pentax mono
- Start date
Photography would get easier technically, but not artistically. I'd need perfectness from 14mm to 400mm, however, and in a small form factor. That would be great, and I could finally concentrate on making interesting pictures without worrying about gear. Some find joy in perfecting their gear, I don't.
Last edited:
I already have it, and I am not feeling any better, I am not getting anything I couldn't get before.
It is a tough pill to swallow but it is true (for my case). What I would do with my dream setup is go out and shoot. First shoot the things I always wanted, then go out and shoot with others in situations I have not been in before.
When I am done with that I will look at what i have and see what areas I need to improve by doing workshops, shooting with better/more experienced photographers etc.
It is a tough pill to swallow but it is true (for my case). What I would do with my dream setup is go out and shoot. First shoot the things I always wanted, then go out and shoot with others in situations I have not been in before.
When I am done with that I will look at what i have and see what areas I need to improve by doing workshops, shooting with better/more experienced photographers etc.
Michael Benveniste
Veteran Member
Can I use two of them to replace my eyes?
J
jjbinx
Guest
The optically perfect lens would still be limited by diffraction and so the idea of unlimited resolution cannot be realised, regardless of the camera’s capabilities
jj
jj
Last edited:
You can still have resolution beyond the eye's ability to see within a tiny part of the image, provided you only print very large and look quite close - not too large and not too close.
I aspire some of the time to capture landscapes that can be interesting when viewed large and close. 61Mpix is quite challenging to compose to and most lenses do OK by f8-9.
Unless you use Tilt to change the orientation of the plane of critical focus, you are boxed into a corner of depth of field vs diffraction, as you say.
Shot with the plane of focus tilted below horizontal using an EF 24mm TSE II
Hence my view that for all practical purposes, I already have the resolution and lens capability I need (and am prepared to carry).
A
--
Infinite are the arguments of mages. Truth is a jewel with many facets. Ursula K LeGuin
Please feel free to edit any images that I post
I have not been concerned about megapixels for years. Dynamic range has been an issue. For landscape work, I want to be able to dial back a bit on sky brightness and up foreground brightness. Current camera tech is pretty good in this regard but I could appreciate a bit more improvement and further reducing high ISO noise.
Otherwise I am happy with the current tech and doubt I will be upgrading for many years.
Otherwise I am happy with the current tech and doubt I will be upgrading for many years.
a_c_skinner
Forum Pro
What then? With the perfect lens? I'd post on here asking if anyone knew if an updated version was in the pipeline.
Well... My eyes cannot tell the difference between 6 MPx and 26 MPx, so the resolution is not a limiting factor. Neither is lens quality. Though if I could have an 8-800 f/1.4 pocketable zoom, I'd be very happy. Can we also ban diffraction while we are at it?
I will be also very happy to never blow highlights in my photos ever again because of the infinite DR. ETTR will become EWYW, Expose While You Wait.
I think people will continue taking same photos though.
Last edited:
john isaacs
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 10,448
- Solutions
- 22
- Reaction score
- 9,916
I couldn't afford it or carry it, or afford the computer resources required to process it. So nothing would change for me.
Paul Pasco
Forum Pro
Alone, those two things are irrelevant. The eye and mind of the photographer is still more important.
tbcass
Forum Pro
It wouldn't change anything for me.
Who are we fooling ... we would probably be speculating all day about the release date of the Mark II version! ;-)
Last edited:
pentax mono
Leading Member
- Messages
- 722
- Reaction score
- 757
that's great ,,,,, that's extremely funny
monte12345
Veteran Member
What do we take pictures of, we take pictures of the Imperfect. Be it Buildings, People, Nature, or Animals look closely enough and you will find "defects". As for Resolution, Digital imaging has reached the point where we can make images with detail at a level that Human Eyesight cannot resolve. If nobody can see that detail do we really need that detail? How often do you put a grain of salt under a microscope and check to insure it's a perfect cube without any defect before adding it to that pot of stew you have going on your stove. Just about NEVER EVER.
Point is that Photography is NOT perfect and I don't think it ever will be. Because it's learning how to work around the "defects" that make it challenging and interesting. If there weren't any "defects" in the process or equipment it would become pretty Boring pretty quickly. Because sitting at a desk and doing nothing but pushing the Print key would have all of us looking for something more interesting to do.
Point is that Photography is NOT perfect and I don't think it ever will be. Because it's learning how to work around the "defects" that make it challenging and interesting. If there weren't any "defects" in the process or equipment it would become pretty Boring pretty quickly. Because sitting at a desk and doing nothing but pushing the Print key would have all of us looking for something more interesting to do.
Optical perfection is a nonexistent illusion because everyone has a different definition. For example, there is no universally accepted definition on out of focus quality.
But to address your question. If such a lens did exist, then I will be looking for imperfection to chase after that elusive "character." But by then, I am sure, software will be miles ahead and hardware will only be relevant to the diehards.
Sam Bennett
Veteran Member
To expand on this, I personally find perfection boring. This is part of the reason I no longer obsess over sharpness, etc. A technically perfect photo of an uninteresting subject is still a "bad" photo, IMO.
I like to introduce imperfection to my optics - for my concert photography, I typically use diffusion filters to add blooming around lights. One of my favorite lenses introduces spherical aberration to produce smoother OOF areas. I add film grain to my photos. Those things without an interesting subject are still useless, but they can add a "vibe" that make an already-interesting composition look more interesting.
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum