dbostock
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
Koivulehto wrote:
David's shot is a marvellous one - it is obvious already in the web version. David says he has shot the scene with several other high priced lenses but not with other 50 mm lenses. I take David's word for this image being much better than his previous shots in the qualities David lists. I doubt that his enthusiasm is only because of different FL; it is more likely because of the overall IQ aspects of this L lens, which have very little to do with the widest aperture. As an example of other image qualities (not related to this shot nor lens), here is a bokeh comparison of three Canon lenses at f/4 and 85 mm: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/490700/10
I have 50 f/1.4 and don't plan to change it because at the moment I have "more gear than talent", as someone's signature says.
...Show more →
Thanks Lauri,
Some of the qualities I look for in lenses can't be represented by resolution charts or sharpness/focus tests. I look for clarity/brilliance of the entire image at this range and all ranges...As some have stated, most lenses will show a nice DOF at f/11. But the more subjective qualities have to do with how well the lens exhibits the subtle changes in light, the subtle changes in texture, the subtle changes in "definition" of an object? How "real" does it look? I'm looking for qualities that, so far, can't be measured, but certainly can be appreciated in the final print.
Remember when CDs first came out? Many hi-fi experts felt the sound was sterile and that records had a warmer, real sound to them...difficult to measure, but definitely there...Similarly, consider the subjective qualities of one set of speakers compared to another. Both, when hooked up to a quality amplifier will deliver wonderful sound, but each has their own qualities that make them unique...you might like one set, while I might prefer the other...
One example of lens quality is its ability to render the star effect from a strong light source. Yes, this is subjective. But, it is representative of the quality of the aperture blades and the glass...Here's a comparison of the same scene shot with four different Canon lenses:
http://davidbostockphotography.com/webposts/LensTest.jpg
This isn't scientific...They were all shot with the Canon 1DsII and at f/11. But I reduced a couple of them to show at a similar size...this is simply a comparison of each len's ability to render a star effect.
In my opinion, the 16-35 yeilds the least desireable pattern. And, that's in keeping with my own perceptions of the image quality of the lens. While I like the versatility of this lens, I will not use it for night time shots because I just don't like the way the lights turn out.
The 14mm is the next least desireable look. It's far superior to the 16-35, but everything's relative...the image is good, but not great...By the way, the shot that this particular crop came from is my best selling image...
The 24 TS/E is nice. I like the quality of the star pattern very much; it has definition, you can see there is little "fuzziness" to the "arms" of the star.
Finally, the 50mm. The definition of the star is awesome in my opinion. No fuzziness in the star pattern. It's sharp, clear, and well-defined.
Consider this: Every point of light reflecting off the surface of everything that comes through a lens exhibits the same qualities as the street lights. Every point of light will yeild a star pattern at f/11. You can't see the star patterns in most of those points of light because they're so microscopically small, but make no mistake; they are there, nevertheless. And they impact the quality of the points of light surrounding them, which in turn, impact the points of light surrounding them...and so on and so on...
In my own, subjective, final analysis, I would easily pick the 50mm over any of the others in this comparison. The 24mm TS/E is in second, but frankly a distant second.
Thanks for taking the time to read this unscientific, subjective analysis of lens quality. Me? The 50mm is an awesome lens and a keeper.
Cheers,
|
