RustyBug
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
One thing that Bastian's (and Fred's, etc.) tests show ... is just how much disparity there exists in optical design choices / options / approaches. While this is true of many tests and is always true of optics in general, the polarity of attributes in this one has been an order of magnitude that makes the diff's VERY EASY to see.
By that, the issues of bokeh, contrast, size, weight, field curvature, resolution, etc. are of such difference, that words like "crucified" wouldn't be in use, if the diff's were only marginal or incremental. So, here again, we have the matter of "choose your poison(s)". For some, the size and weight of the Typoch is the poison they choose to NOT have. For others, the field curvature and vignetting are the poisons they choose to NOT have. And for others, the lack of contrast or resolution is the poison they choose to NOT have.
It's been more than a decade since the good folks here in the Alt Forum (some have moved on) made me realize / understand that the bevy of attributes in optics makes it absolutely impossible for ALL aspects of optics to be optimized, as certain attributes are diametrically opposed. In that manner, I adopted the "choose your poison(s)" perspective in lieu of the "better" (at a single attribute).
Sharpness / Resolution vs. Bokeh
Size / Weight vs. Vignetting
Corners vs. Field Curvature
Field Curvature vs. Separation
Size / Weight vs. Speed
Contrast vs. Flare Resistance
Etc.
To that end, we all have different reasons for different poison(s) being to our intense disdain. Some folks find the size / weight matter their most intense poison. Others find bokeh or CA, theirs. For yet others, it's vignetting and distortion or field curvature. At the end of the day, ALL OPTICS have their poison(s) ... so we often choose those that have the least amount of poison(s) that concern our wants, desires and needs. Great optics typically do a good job of balancing out things so that the magnitude of them are low. While other lenses can be made much more inexpensively, if they will forego one (or more) of those attributes.
And, by the term of "expense" ... that isn't just in terms of dollars, but size and weight, haptics, field curvature, vignetting etc. are other forms of the expense, that is part of the quid pro quo that are inherent to optics.
Choose your poison(s). Others will choose theirs. Just because someone finds their disdain for a given attribute to be intense ... that neither invalidates, nor validates the choices that each of us make. We all have to live with the choices we make.
Tests like Bastian's (and Fred's, etc.) make it easier to see the diff's those poisons bring to the table. That doesn't make it easier for everyone to come similar decisions ... in reality it makes it easier for folks to come to different decisions. And, there will always be different folks, opting to avoid different poison(s), for different reasons.
My reason(s) may not be someone else's ... but, they are still the ones that I have to live with ... not anyone else. And, it cuts the other way, too. I don't have to live with the choices that someone else makes. They make their choice and they live with it, regardless of whether I find it a choice I'd make or not. No such thing as a perfect optic ... they all have their poison(s).
Choose your poison(s), wisely.
They'll be the things that bother you the most ... and reduce your joy, the worst. And, realize that others may drink from a different cup than you.
And, sometimes those same poison(s) to one person ... are another person's "character" (i.e. characteristic) of choice. 
|
