What are the most aspirational, most "artistic" lenses for Sony?
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think it would be most illuminating for people to post a couple images they feel artistic with the lenses being discussed.
I think the thread is probably talking past each other because people don’t agree on what “aspirational” and “artistic” are. A visual definition and explanation would be helpful for reference. Not that is one is right or wrong, but to understand what the other person means.
@AGeoJO@ I do think that’s generally true, but some lens do draw exceptionally differently…making some images essentially impossible, or requiring lots of time and post processing gymnastics as some approximation. And your answer bypasses the thread question
Here is a photo from a 35 Lux pre-asph that is going to look radically different (and far more generic IMO) with a GM 35 or Sigma 35/1.2
I think what I most mean is a handling of light and edges that facilitates an emotional rendering of a scene; that makes the image seem to come from a special place that has almost an altered, more intense version of reality. But I'm not sure that actually says much.
I agree with @philip_pj@ that we might each have our own muses, as we probably would all agree.
And I agree with your suggestion about posting pictures that show our version of what we mean. Also, it is nice to see images from everyone that answer at least some of what we hoped for when we released the shutter.
Here are three from three of my favorite lenses. The first is from the Sigma i Series 45mm f2.8 and the second is from the Batis 40mm f2.0. The third, I think, is from the Canon 50mm 1.2L, but it might be from the 24-70GM II, whose rendering I also like very much. I just pulled these from my uploads here since it would take me forever to find the original files.
What are the most aspirational, most "artistic" lenses for Sony?
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think it would be most illuminating for people to post a couple images they feel artistic with the lenses being discussed.
I think the thread is probably talking past each other because people don’t agree on what “aspirational” and “artistic” are. A visual definition and explanation would be helpful for reference. Not that is one is right or wrong, but to understand what the other person means.
@AGeoJO@ I do think that’s generally true, but some lens do draw exceptionally differently…making some images essentially impossible, or requiring lots of time and post processing gymnastics as some approximation. And your answer bypasses the thread question
Here is a photo from a 35 Lux pre-asph that is going to look radically different (and far more generic IMO) with a GM 35 or Sigma 35/1.2
I think what I most mean is a handling of light and edges that facilitates an emotional rendering of a scene; that makes the image seem to come from a special place that has almost an altered, more intense version of reality. But I'm not sure that actually says much.
I agree with @philip_pj@ that we might each have our own muses, as we probably would all agree.
And I agree with your suggestion about posting pictures that show our version of what we mean. Also, it is nice to see images from everyone that answer at least some of what we hoped for when we released the shutter.
Here are three from three of my favorite lenses. The first is from the Sigma i Series 45mm f2.8 and the second is from the Batis 40mm f2.0. The third, I think, is from the Canon 50mm 1.2L, but it might be from the 24-70GM II, whose rendering I also like very much. I just pulled these from my uploads here since it would take me forever to find the original files.
What are the most aspirational, most "artistic" lenses for Sony?
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think it would be most illuminating for people to post a couple images they feel artistic with the lenses being discussed.
I think the thread is probably talking past each other because people don’t agree on what “aspirational” and “artistic” are. A visual definition and explanation would be helpful for reference. Not that is one is right or wrong, but to understand what the other person means.
@AGeoJO@ I do think that’s generally true, but some lens do draw exceptionally differently…making some images essentially impossible, or requiring lots of time and post processing gymnastics as some approximation. And your answer bypasses the thread question
Here is a photo from a 35 Lux pre-asph that is going to look radically different (and far more generic IMO) with a GM 35 or Sigma 35/1.2
I think what I most mean is a handling of light and edges that facilitates an emotional rendering of a scene; that makes the image seem to come from a special place that has almost an altered, more intense version of reality. But I'm not sure that actually says much.
I agree with @philip_pj@ that we might each have our own muses, as we probably would all agree.
And I agree with your suggestion about posting pictures that show our version of what we mean. Also, it is nice to see images from everyone that answer at least some of what we hoped for when we released the shutter.
Here are two from two of my favorite lenses. The first is from the Sigma i Series 45mm f2.8 and the second is from the Batis 40mm f2.0. I just pulled them from my uploads here since it would take me forever to find the original files.
What are the most aspirational, most "artistic" lenses for Sony?
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think it would be most illuminating for people to post a couple images they feel artistic with the lenses being discussed.
I think the thread is probably talking past each other because people don’t agree on what “aspirational” and “artistic” are. A visual definition and explanation would be helpful for reference. Not that is one is right or wrong, but to understand what the other person means.
@AGeoJO@ I do think that’s generally true, but some lens do draw exceptionally differently…making some images essentially impossible, or requiring lots of time and post processing gymnastics as some approximation. And your answer bypasses the thread question
Here is a photo from a 35 Lux pre-asph that is going to look radically different (and far more generic IMO) with a GM 35 or Sigma 35/1.2
I think what I most mean is a handling of light and edges that facilitates an emotional rendering of a scene; that makes the image seem to come from a special place that has almost an altered, more intense version of reality. But I'm not sure that actually says much.
I agree with @philip_pj@ that we might each have our own muses, as we probably would all agree.
And I agree with your suggestion about posting pictures that show our version of what we mean. Also, it is nice to see images from everyone that answer at least some of what we hoped for when we released the shutter.
Here are two from two of my favorite lenses. The first is from the Sigma i Series 45mm f2.8 and the second is from the Batis 40mm f2.0. I just pulled them from my uploads here since it would take me forever to find the original files.
What are the most aspirational, most "artistic" lenses for Sony?
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think it would be most illuminating for people to post a couple images they feel artistic with the lenses being discussed.
I think the thread is probably talking past each other because people don’t agree on what “aspirational” and “artistic” are. A visual definition and explanation would be helpful for reference. Not that is one is right or wrong, but to understand what the other person means.
@AGeoJO@ I do think that’s generally true, but some lens do draw exceptionally differently…making some images essentially impossible, or requiring lots of time and post processing gymnastics as some approximation. And your answer bypasses the thread question
Here is a photo from a 35 Lux pre-asph that is going to look radically different (and far more generic IMO) with a GM 35 or Sigma 35/1.2
I think what I most mean is a handling of light and edges that facilitates an emotional rendering of a scene; that makes the image seem to come from a special place. But I'm not sure that actually says much.
I agree with @philip_pj@ that we might each have our own muses, as we probably would all agree.
And I agree with your suggestion about posting pictures that show our version of what we mean. Also, it is nice to see images from everyone that answer at least some of what we hoped for when we released the shutter.
Here are two from two of my favorite lenses. The first is from the Sigma i Series 45mm f2.8 and the second is from the Batis 40mm f2.0. I just pulled them from my uploads here since it would take me forever to find the original files.
What are the most aspirational, most "artistic" lenses for Sony?
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think it would be most illuminating for people to post a couple images they feel artistic with the lenses being discussed.
I think the thread is probably talking past each other because people don’t agree on what “aspirational” and “artistic” are. A visual definition and explanation would be helpful for reference. Not that is one is right or wrong, but to understand what the other person means.
@AGeoJO@ I do think that’s generally true, but some lens do draw exceptionally differently…making some images essentially impossible, or requiring lots of time and post processing gymnastics as some approximation. And your answer bypasses the thread question
Here is a photo from a 35 Lux pre-asph that is going to look radically different (and far more generic IMO) with a GM 35 or Sigma 35/1.2
I think what I most mean is a handling of light and edges that facilitates an emotional rendering of a scene; that makes the image seem to come from a special place--but I'm not sure that actually says much.
I agree with @philip_pj@ that we might each have our own muses, as we probably would all agree.
And I agree with your suggestion about posting pictures that show our version of what we mean. Also, it is nice to see images from everyone that answer at least some of what we hoped for when we released the shutter.
Here are two from two of my favorite lenses. The first is from the Sigma i Series 45mm f2.8 and the second is from the Batis 40mm f2.0. I just pulled them from my uploads here since it would take me forever to find the original files.
What are the most aspirational, most "artistic" lenses for Sony?
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think it would be most illuminating for people to post a couple images they feel artistic with the lenses being discussed.
I think the thread is probably talking past each other because people don’t agree on what “aspirational” and “artistic” are. A visual definition and explanation would be helpful for reference. Not that is one is right or wrong, but to understand what the other person means.
@AGeoJO@ I do think that’s generally true, but some lens do draw exceptionally differently…making some images essentially impossible, or requiring lots of time and post processing gymnastics as some approximation. And your answer bypasses the thread question
Here is a photo from a 35 Lux pre-asph that is going to look radically different (and far more generic IMO) with a GM 35 or Sigma 35/1.2
I am not quite sure if we have to agree on what makes a lens aspirational or artistic, as I think you probably agree. I think what I most mean is a handling of light and edges that facilitates an emotional rendering of a scene--but I'm not sure that says much..
I agree with @philip_pj@ that we might each have our own muses, as we probably would all agree.
And I agree with your suggestion about pictures that show our version of what we mean. Also, it is nice to see images from everyone that answer at least some of what we hoped for when we released the shutter.
Here are two from two of my favorite lenses. The first is from the Sigma i Series 45mm f2.8 and the second is from the Batis 40mm f2.0. I just pulled them from my uploads here.
What are the most aspirational, most "artistic" lenses for Sony?
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think it would be most illuminating for people to post a couple images they feel artistic with the lenses being discussed.
I think the thread is probably talking past each other because people don’t agree on what “aspirational” and “artistic” are. A visual definition and explanation would be helpful for reference. Not that is one is right or wrong, but to understand what the other person means.
@AGeoJO@ I do think that’s generally true, but some lens do draw exceptionally differently…making some images essentially impossible, or requiring lots of time and post processing gymnastics as some approximation. And your answer bypasses the thread question
Here is a photo from a 35 Lux pre-asph that is going to look radically different (and far more generic IMO) with a GM 35 or Sigma 35/1.2
Here are two from two of my favorite lenses. The first is from the Sigma i Series 45mm f2.8 and the second is from the Batis 40mm f2.0:
What are the most aspirational, most "artistic" lenses for Sony?
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think it would be most illuminating for people to post a couple images they feel artistic with the lenses being discussed.
I think the thread is probably talking past each other because people don’t agree on what “aspirational” and “artistic” are. A visual definition and explanation would be helpful for reference. Not that is one is right or wrong, but to understand what the other person means.
@AGeoJO@ I do think that’s generally true, but some lens do draw exceptionally differently…making some images essentially impossible, or requiring lots of time and post processing gymnastics as some approximation. And your answer bypasses the thread question
Here is a photo from a 35 Lux pre-asph that is going to look radically different (and far more generic IMO) with a GM 35 or Sigma 35/1.2
Here are three from two of my favorite lenses. The first is from the Sigma i Series 45mm f2.8 and the second is from the Batis 40mm f2.0:
What are the most aspirational, most "artistic" lenses for Sony?
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think it would be most illuminating for people to post a couple images they feel artistic with the lenses being discussed.
I think the thread is probably talking past each other because people don’t agree on what “aspirational” and “artistic” are. A visual definition and explanation would be helpful for reference. Not that is one is right or wrong, but to understand what the other person means.
@AGeoJO@ I do think that’s generally true, but some lens do draw exceptionally differently…making some images essentially impossible, or requiring lots of time and post processing gymnastics as some approximation. And your answer bypasses the thread question
Here is a photo from a 35 Lux pre-asph that is going to look radically different (and far more generic IMO) with a GM 35 or Sigma 35/1.2
Here are three from three of my favorite lenses. The first is from the Sigma i Series 45mm f2.8 and the second is from the Batis 40mm f2.0; the third, I think, is from the Canon 50mm 1.2L:
What are the most aspirational, most "artistic" lenses for Sony?
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think it would be most illuminating for people to post a couple images they feel artistic with the lenses being discussed.
I think the thread is probably talking past each other because people don’t agree on what “aspirational” and “artistic” are. A visual definition and explanation would be helpful for reference. Not that is one is right or wrong, but to understand what the other person means.
@AGeoJO@ I do think that’s generally true, but some lens do draw exceptionally differently…making some images essentially impossible, or requiring lots of time and post processing gymnastics as some approximation. And your answer bypasses the thread question
Here is a photo from a 35 Lux pre-asph that is going to look radically different (and far more generic IMO) with a GM 35 or Sigma 35/1.2
Here are three from three of my favorite lenses. The first is from the Sigma i Series 45mm f2.8 and the second is from the Batis 40mm f2.0; the third, I think, is from the Canon 50mm 1.2L:
What are the most aspirational, most "artistic" lenses for Sony?
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think it would be most illuminating for people to post a couple images they feel artistic with the lenses being discussed.
I think the thread is probably talking past each other because people don’t agree on what “aspirational” and “artistic” are. A visual definition and explanation would be helpful for reference. Not that is one is right or wrong, but to understand what the other person means.
@AGeoJO@ I do think that’s generally true, but some lens do draw exceptionally differently…making some images essentially impossible, or requiring lots of time and post processing gymnastics as some approximation. And your answer bypasses the thread question
Here is a photo from a 35 Lux pre-asph that is going to look radically different (and far more generic IMO) with a GM 35 or Sigma 35/1.2
Here are two from two of my favorite lenses. The first is from the Sigma i Series 45mm f2.8 and the second is from the Batis 40mm f2.0:
What are the most aspirational, most "artistic" lenses for Sony?
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think it would be most illuminating for people to post a couple images they feel artistic with the lenses being discussed.
I think the thread is probably talking past each other because people don’t agree on what “aspirational” and “artistic” are. A visual definition and explanation would be helpful for reference. Not that is one is right or wrong, but to understand what the other person means.
@AGeoJO@ I do think that’s generally true, but some lens do draw exceptionally differently…making some images essentially impossible, or requiring lots of time and post processing gymnastics as some approximation. And your answer bypasses the thread question
Here is a photo from a 35 Lux pre-asph that is going to look radically different (and far more generic IMO) with a GM 35 or Sigma 35/1.2
Here are two from two of my favorite lenses. The first is from the Sigma i Series 45mm f2.8 and the second is from the Batis 40mm f2.0:
What are the most aspirational, most "artistic" lenses for Sony?
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think it would be most illuminating for people to post a couple images they feel artistic with the lenses being discussed.
I think the thread is probably talking past each other because people don’t agree on what “aspirational” and “artistic” are. A visual definition and explanation would be helpful for reference. Not that is one is right or wrong, but to understand what the other person means.
@AGeoJO@ I do think that’s generally true, but some lens do draw exceptionally differently…making some images essentially impossible, or requiring lots of time and post processing gymnastics as some approximation. And your answer bypasses the thread question
Here is a photo from a 35 Lux pre-asph that is going to look radically different (and far more generic IMO) with a GM 35 or Sigma 35/1.2
Here are two from two of my favorite lenses. The first is from the Sigma i Series 45mm f2.8 and the second is from the Batis 40mm f2.0:
Jun 18, 2025 at 04:11 PM
Previous versions of chiron's message #16835866 « What are the most aspirational, most "artistic" lenses for Sony? »
