Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Has digital era changed the way we measure lens quality?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 1:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
spiralcity wrote:
I am not a professional photographer, and I am uncertain as to how many professional photographers view this site. I use what I can afford and shoot images that please me. I find NO use in pixel peeping and I have little use for a $2,000.00 lens when my average lenses perform well with-in my needs.

I use very little PP and I do find some of my lenses display a more natural look than others. I like the look my Fujinon”s produce, so I tend to use them a bit more than my other lenses. (although my Nikons get a good work-out also)

I do find much of the technical information useful and intriguing, be it talking about post processing or the number of lens elements in any given lens and so forth… but this information really dosent change the way I shoot.

So I guess agree with LucisPictor's statements.


Many professionals do not have the equipment that many of that here expose, and to all, professionals or amateurs, should take pictures with a team they love. Many lenses of U$S 1000/2000.-do not have the quality or the characteristics that I like. Automatic lenses, they are more comfortable of using, not more professionals. I would like to use movie instead of sensor, but I conform to the " old manual lenses ".
What I appreciate most of this forum is that members are concerned about the quality of the image, the bokeh, the sharpness. And that although you may not believe " is slightly professional "

To me, a good professional must have "feeling amateur"

Returning to the post of seta666 at least the PS is used to correct problems of lenses, the better the outcome, the bokeh of a Sonnar 180/2.8 can not be achieved in post processing.

I hope you understand, greetings to all Very Happy


PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 1:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
francotirador wrote:
spiralcity wrote:
I am not a professional photographer, and I am uncertain as to how many professional photographers view this site. I use what I can afford and shoot images that please me. I find NO use in pixel peeping and I have little use for a $2,000.00 lens when my average lenses perform well with-in my needs.

I use very little PP and I do find some of my lenses display a more natural look than others. I like the look my Fujinon”s produce, so I tend to use them a bit more than my other lenses. (although my Nikons get a good work-out also)

I do find much of the technical information useful and intriguing, be it talking about post processing or the number of lens elements in any given lens and so forth… but this information really dosent change the way I shoot.

So I guess agree with LucisPictor's statements.


Many professionals do not have the equipment that many of that here expose, and to all, professionals or amateurs, should take pictures with a team they love. Many lenses of U$S 1000/2000.-do not have the quality or the characteristics that I like. Automatic lenses, they are more comfortable of using, not more professionals. I would like to use movie instead of sensor, but I conform to the " old manual lenses ".
What I appreciate most of this forum is that members are concerned about the quality of the image, the bokeh, the sharpness. And that although you may not believe " is slightly professional "

To me, a good professional must have "feeling amateur"

Returning to the post of seta666 at least the PS is used to correct problems of lenses, the better the outcome, the bokeh of a Sonnar 180/2.8 can not be achieved in post processing.

I hope you understand, greetings to all Very Happy


A profesional photographer is someone who earns his livng selling his images. Being a pro has nothing to do with the knowlege you may or may not have as a photorapher.

What I appreciate most of this forum is that members are concerned about the quality of the image, the bokeh, the sharpness. And that although you may not believe " is slightly professional

This has nothing to do with being a pro, it only tells me that you may or may not know something about DOF.

I, as well as many who view this site have some sort of education in photography, be it local college or major college. This does not make us pro's. You may want to view my blog for a better understanding of my background. (Just click the Free Photography Course in my sig.)


I feel we all use our ablilities to their fullest regardless of our standing in the photo community.

Perhaps I lost something in translation... Shocked


PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 1:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
spiralcity wrote:
francotirador wrote:
spiralcity wrote:
I am not a professional photographer, and I am uncertain as to how many professional photographers view this site. I use what I can afford and shoot images that please me. I find NO use in pixel peeping and I have little use for a $2,000.00 lens when my average lenses perform well with-in my needs.

I use very little PP and I do find some of my lenses display a more natural look than others. I like the look my Fujinon”s produce, so I tend to use them a bit more than my other lenses. (although my Nikons get a good work-out also)

I do find much of the technical information useful and intriguing, be it talking about post processing or the number of lens elements in any given lens and so forth… but this information really dosent change the way I shoot.

So I guess agree with LucisPictor's statements.


Many professionals do not have the equipment that many of that here expose, and to all, professionals or amateurs, should take pictures with a team they love. Many lenses of U$S 1000/2000.-do not have the quality or the characteristics that I like. Automatic lenses, they are more comfortable of using, not more professionals. I would like to use movie instead of sensor, but I conform to the " old manual lenses ".
What I appreciate most of this forum is that members are concerned about the quality of the image, the bokeh, the sharpness. And that although you may not believe " is slightly professional "

To me, a good professional must have "feeling amateur"

Returning to the post of seta666 at least the PS is used to correct problems of lenses, the better the outcome, the bokeh of a Sonnar 180/2.8 can not be achieved in post processing.

I hope you understand, greetings to all Very Happy


A profesional photographer is someone who earns his livng selling his images. Being a pro has nothing to do with the knowlege you may or may not have as a photorapher.

What I appreciate most of this forum is that members are concerned about the quality of the image, the bokeh, the sharpness. And that although you may not believe " is slightly professional

This has nothing to do with being a pro, it only tells me that you may or may not know something about DOF.

I, as well as many who view this site have some sort of education in photography, be it local college or major college. This does not make us pro's. You may want to view my blog for a better understanding of my background. (Just click the Free Photography Course in my sig.)


I feel we all use our ablilities to their fullest regardless of our standing in the photo community.

Perhaps I lost something in translation... Shocked


What I wanted to emphasize is that many members of this forum are more qualified than many professionals to talk about photography. Commitment to your images is wonderful, I love the passion to find "the lens" to be special.
Greetings,


PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
francotirador wrote:
spiralcity wrote:
francotirador wrote:
spiralcity wrote:
I am not a professional photographer, and I am uncertain as to how many professional photographers view this site. I use what I can afford and shoot images that please me. I find NO use in pixel peeping and I have little use for a $2,000.00 lens when my average lenses perform well with-in my needs.

I use very little PP and I do find some of my lenses display a more natural look than others. I like the look my Fujinon”s produce, so I tend to use them a bit more than my other lenses. (although my Nikons get a good work-out also)

I do find much of the technical information useful and intriguing, be it talking about post processing or the number of lens elements in any given lens and so forth… but this information really dosent change the way I shoot.

So I guess agree with LucisPictor's statements.


Many professionals do not have the equipment that many of that here expose, and to all, professionals or amateurs, should take pictures with a team they love. Many lenses of U$S 1000/2000.-do not have the quality or the characteristics that I like. Automatic lenses, they are more comfortable of using, not more professionals. I would like to use movie instead of sensor, but I conform to the " old manual lenses ".
What I appreciate most of this forum is that members are concerned about the quality of the image, the bokeh, the sharpness. And that although you may not believe " is slightly professional "

To me, a good professional must have "feeling amateur"

Returning to the post of seta666 at least the PS is used to correct problems of lenses, the better the outcome, the bokeh of a Sonnar 180/2.8 can not be achieved in post processing.

I hope you understand, greetings to all Very Happy


A profesional photographer is someone who earns his livng selling his images. Being a pro has nothing to do with the knowlege you may or may not have as a photorapher.

What I appreciate most of this forum is that members are concerned about the quality of the image, the bokeh, the sharpness. And that although you may not believe " is slightly professional

This has nothing to do with being a pro, it only tells me that you may or may not know something about DOF.

I, as well as many who view this site have some sort of education in photography, be it local college or major college. This does not make us pro's. You may want to view my blog for a better understanding of my background. (Just click the Free Photography Course in my sig.)


I feel we all use our ablilities to their fullest regardless of our standing in the photo community.

Perhaps I lost something in translation... Shocked


What I wanted to emphasize is that many members of this forum are more qualified than many professionals to talk about photography. Commitment to your images is wonderful, I love the passion to find "the lens" to be special.
Greetings,


Yes, I agree, there are many well informed people here. I find much of the info shared very useful and insightful.


PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The above discussion has been interesting, but I think it has wandered a little from the original topic - which is something I've wondered about myself. Although I've little experience with post-processing, I can see that some things would be easily altered digitally, that were (are) difficult to do with film.

-some photographers like the creative use of lens vignetting. I believe it is very easy to add an artificial vignette with software, so it can't ever really be seen as an advantage of a lens attached to a digital sensor. On the other hand, removing vignetting is similarly straightforward (though you loose a little latitude). I'd say that (at least moderate) vignetting is therefore not so important on a digital sensor
-bokeh: can't easily do much in PP, so an still a really important characteristic of a lens
-chromatic aberrations can sometimes be fixed relatively easily in PP (see above discussion by people more knowledgeable than me)
-distortions are fixable by PP to some extent (depends on type and you loose some image quality/part of image)
-sharpness. PP can't add information that's not there. Another consideration is that use of lenses on different formats (crop cameras) changes how important sharpness in different parts of the (full) frame is.
-overall contrast is easily boosted by PP (I don't know if you can boost microcontrast by PP)
-flaring is potentially a greater issue with digital (the addition of sensor flare)
-Colour tone. I don't really have enough experience to comment how closely one lens's colour characteristics could be matched to another's by PP. Has anyone tried to e.g. make the colour of a Nikkor look like a Zeiss?

I'd find any thoughts on the use of PP to change/make up for characteristics of lenses interesting. I quite understand the desire to leave images as-is, and understand that starting with a better lens would always be preferable. Nevertheless, I'm interested in the possibilities for digital manipulation.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2