chiron Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments? | |
smpetty wrote:
IMO, all good enough, and any differences seen are subtle and could be independent of the lens itself (motion, change in lighting, bad mojo, etc.). This series makes me believe that we spend too much time splitting hairs. For general photography, I doubt that IQ would be the separating factor between these lenses. Other features (size, speed, AF accuracy, MF or AF, weather sealing, cost, etc.) would likely be more important.
Hi Scott.
I am also struck by how good they all are, really, and how close they are to each other. The lenses are very different in size, weight, cost, year of design, maximum aperture, brand, and whether they have autofocus. But they all yield very acceptable good images (at least of this scene). Any of them can be used to create excellent pictures. And you are right that to the extent this is true, we should pay more attention to other variables like size, weight, and cost.
There are still differences among the lenses, and some would be better than others for particular types of pictures. Two of the lenses would struggle with getting to a max ap of f1.2 if such were desired for a particular photo.
I guess one question to consider might be this: What are the characteristics of this scene in terms of their effect on rendering that might vary if a different scene had been chosen? For example, there are no bokeh balls in this image and no flare. Would a very different scene have shown stronger differences among the lenses, and what types of scenes might show more striking differences?
(So what, I say under my breath, there are very few bokeh balls or flares in any of my photographs.)
|