Gochugogi wrote:
You probably haven't been to downtown Honolulu and the waterfront but it ain't no Waikiki and there are few tourists. However, there are lots of druggies, homeless, hoes and Chinatown is funky and third world (smells like pee everywhere). Great for street shooting, very photogenic and sometimes you gotta be ready to run like the wind! Drug dealers and gamblers hate the sight of cameras (hence longer zoom).
You're correct, I was referring to Hawaii's reputation as a whole (touristy), but now you've described your particular scenario, I'll be sure to avoid the area if I ever visit
cputeq wrote:
True, but in such a situation I'd think a 28-300 would be more useful
I think we just have differing ideas of what constitutes a "walk-around" lens - nothing wrong with that!
Yeah but show me a 28-300 that delivers top corner to corner quality on FF. We never even had any zoom on the sub 70mm range alone that even did that until now.
(I think those also weigh like 3x what a 24-70 or 24 1.4 + 70-200 f/4 IS/70-300L do and take up even more space.)
I wont argue the sharpness angle, as I am sure your combo would win that battle, but again I think we are using different definitions of "walk-around."
For me, it would entail acceptably sharp and no lens changes though I think yes the 28-300 is pretty heavy so it might actually not meet my other criteria, "comfortable to use". I have found the 24-105 mostly adequate as a general WAL, though, while other people cannot stand it.
skibum5 wrote:
Yeah but show me a 28-300 that delivers top corner to corner quality on FF. We never even had any zoom on the sub 70mm range alone that even did that until now.
(I think those also weigh like 3x what a 24-70 or 24 1.4 + 70-200 f/4 IS/70-300L do and take up even more space.)
I don't know your definition of "top corner to corner quality", but mine gives top quality and corner to corner sharpness at f/8. It's not a 100L or 24 TS-E, but it is plenty sharp enough if you saw any of my recent Shuttle move in LA photos. I've seen other photographers post their sharp images on FM using this lens. It's a great all-in-one lens, the downside being its size and weight, but that is far less than all the individual primes it would take to replace with IS throughout its range.
Gunzorro wrote:
I don't know your definition of "top corner to corner quality", but mine gives top quality and corner to corner sharpness at f/8. It's not a 100L or 24 TS-E, but it is plenty sharp enough if you saw any of my recent Shuttle move in LA photos. I've seen other photographers post their sharp images on FM using this lens. It's a great all-in-one lens, the downside being its size and weight, but that is far less than all the individual primes it would take to replace with IS throughout its range.
a different definition then
I tried three and all three looked like mush to me at the edges and corners on 5D2
Since we've broached the subject, I have to ask -- does anyone really pay attention to far corners/edges?
I dont mean to be rhetorical but I am truly curious--besides pixel peeping, what purpose does a sharp corner serve? Most photos will not have the corners or far edges as major points of interest, and I have never had an otherwise good shot ruined by less than stellar edges.
I can see corners and edges serving as leading points to the subject (say a river to a mountain), but never a spot someone would stop at and trash the photo for, since normally they do little for an image as a whole.
Am I missing something? Maybe some field or types of photos where this would be critical?
And before I am flamed -- it is not that I wouldnt argue against sharp corners, its just that I think it is the very last feature I would care about on any lens.
cputeq wrote:
Since we've broached the subject, I have to ask -- does anyone really pay attention to far corners/edges?
And before I am flamed -- it is not that I wouldnt argue against sharp corners, its just that I think it is the very last feature I would care about on any lens.
On a photo forum, yes.
They can be unsightly.
Sharp everywhere is a good thing. Or, 'acceptable'.
However, WA does have limitations and its own character.
I don't mind some corner softness.
Subject is foremost, followed by composition which plays to a lens' strengths.
cputeq wrote:
Since we've broached the subject, I have to ask -- does anyone really pay attention to far corners/edges?
I dont mean to be rhetorical but I am truly curious--besides pixel peeping, what purpose does a sharp corner serve? Most photos will not have the corners or far edges as major points of interest, and I have never had an otherwise good shot ruined by less than stellar edges.
I can see corners and edges serving as leading points to the subject (say a river to a mountain), but never a spot someone would stop at and trash the photo for, since normally they do little for an image as a whole.
Am I missing something? Maybe some field or types of photos where this would be critical?
And before I am flamed -- it is not that I wouldnt argue against sharp corners, its just that I think it is the very last feature I would care about on any lens. ...Show more →
well I can live with the far corners a bit rough but when even the entire anywhere near edge region is rough too I don't like that so much, at least not for certain types of shots (and the 24-105 also tosses a ton of PF on branches against clouds and such too)
Shutterbug2006 wrote:
I don't think that old saying had anything to do with rapids and mossy rocks.
Some people take photographs. Some people make photographs.
I usually find the interesting photographs have everything to do with light.
I understand and am with you completely. But couple that with something compelling, and you have magic.
p.s. One thing that the democracy of digital has done is birth a huge number of trite images due to its ease and economy. flickr, for one, is loaded with technically adept images that blend one into the other; cityscapes, fall color, young women contre jour, light trails... If you'd been capable in the early to mid eighties of what GWC is now, you'd have made a killing on commissions and selling stock.
