gdanmitchell
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens? | |
SGinNorcal wrote:
gdanmitchell wrote:
SGinNorcal wrote:
gdanmitchell wrote:
SGinNorcal wrote:
I believe the character vs. clinical is simply a way many people choose to have a criteria where they get to choose what they like without defining what it is they prefer.
I'm fine with people saying, "I just prefer this lens."
I'm not fine with people justifying (when there's no need to) their simple preference with the veneer of "character."
How would you define lens "character"? Or do you just dislike the term altogether?
I dislike the way the term is used, in particular (where I started this) the common use of the term to contrast lenses that have “character” with those that are “clinical.” It is a implicit shorthand for “virtue” in this and other cases.
“Character” can apparently mean whatever the user wants it to mean. Apparently saying a lens has “character” can simply mean “i like it.” Or it could mean that it has objective faults — excessive vignetting, soft corners, etc. Or it might be a particular characteristic that the owner regards as a virtue, such as smooth, soft bokeh.
Better to, first of all, drop the “clinical” description, as if being sharp and optically well-balanced were a liability. Then better to simply note/describe the feature of the lens with supposed “character” — “nice bokeh, vignetting, soft focus, etc.
Yeah, I’m a bit of stickler about words, their meaning, and how they are used. And I’m not a fan of words that are used to claim value for something by being vague wiht a sort of “if you don’t get it, you don’t understand” vibe ;-)
It isn’t limited to photography terms. Example. I was recently at a fine (yeah, Michelin starred) restaurant to celebrate a milestone event. It was a wonderful experience. But part of the show was the announcement and description of each course as it arrived, during which I heard one of my least favorite au courant culinary terms: “unctious,” used as if it were a good thing.
One definition is as follows:
1. Excessively ingratiating or insincerely earnest.
"was annoyed by the unctuous waiter."
2. Containing or composed of oil or fat.
3 Having the quality or characteristics of oil or ointment; slippery.
;-)
Now you didn't answer my question  I said how would you define character. Not what you think others mean by it. But I get what you mean, there is no universally accepted usage, one persons character is another's crap. When one says "clinical" its a compliment, to others criticism. If think if both are read in context the meaning comes through. In my other passion pursuit, I'm a winemaker for my small production label. I can't but help but think of ways people describe taste and it makes the terms people use for photography seem pretty reasonable. If "unctuous" bugs, you should avoid wine tastings and reviews, its massively overused. At least there is no photographic equivalent of a sommelier, wait, maybe that's a YouTube reviewer! Along those line, in both cases its best to align yourself with a reviewer who appears to see/taste as you do. Then the adjectives become more meaningful. In the end, best not to forget we are supposed to be enjoying these pursuits, lol!
You are kind of coming full circle here. I've said that I don't like the way the term is used. in part because its meaning is so nebulous and confused.
So asking me to define the term that I think is unuseful and amorphous and which I don't use is kind of backwards.
Regarding "clinical," I've heard it used regularly as a criticism of lenses, but I don't think I've ever heard it used in photography as a compliment.
I love good food (I'm a cook and I like to eat out) and we like and collect wine... and every time I hear that term "unctious" used in those contexts I cringe just a bit. ;-)
I'm not sure where your advice to me to "enjoy this pursuits" is coming from... ;-)
|
