I'm not a lens snob.
In fact, I mostly tune out the ad infinitum and ad nauseum
discussions of rendering, edge sharpness, bokeh, etc., that seem to be the
bread and butter of many blogs and web sites. I have difficulty seeing the fine
distinctions they make, and wouldn't care much if I could. A lens is to take
pictures with. If it does a reasonable job of that (as in, do the photos look
okay?) nothing else is required.
I began my full-time professional career in 1978
with a pair of Nikkormats, a 50mm Nikkor, and two Vivitars -- 28mm f2.5 and
100mm f2.8. They were fine. A year or so later, I switched to the Olympus OM
system, which I used for 12 years with great satisfaction. I had quite a few
lenses for the OMs, and all were satisfactory except for the 35-70 f3.6. That
one was a dog.
By 1993, aging eyes dictated a switch to autofocus,
so I bought into the Canon EOS system and used various bodies and lenses for
the next 24 years. Along the way, I used a number of L lenses, including the
28-80 f2.8-4L, the 28-70 f2.8L, and the 24-70 f2.8L (twice). I also owned the
24-104 f4L twice. But I kept going back to the 24-85 f3.5-4.5 and the 28-105
f3.5-4.5, neither of which is an L lens, but both are small and light, fast
enough for the work I do, and again,
sharp enough for the work I do.
Not long after my book Rock City Barns: A Passing Era was published, I walked into my
local pro lab and found another photographer standing at the counter
leafing through my book, which is in 9x12-inch coffee-table format. Having learned from
the lab owner that I was the creator of the book, he asked if I had made the
photos on 5x7-inch film. When I told him no, he said, "Oh, 4x5?" When
I explained that all were made with 35mm cameras, he had difficulty believing
it. But in fact, almost all the photos in the book were shot with the Canon EF
28-105 f3.5-4.5 or the 24mm f2.8. As Kirk Tuck says, there are very few lenses
that aren't sharp at f8!
In 2017 I sold my Canon gear and bought into the Fuji system. I will tell
you that I do not own their more expensive and highly rated lenses, but the
ones I have do the job for me just fine.
I don't do many weddings these days, but here's a photo from a wedding in 2018, taken with a Fuji X-T20 and the 16-50 f3.5-5.6 kit lens at f8.
Full frame: Fuji X-T20, 16-50 f3.5-5.6 kit lens at f8 |
100% crop The blogging process does not render the true sharpness of this photo. In the original the woman's eyelashes are very clearly delineated. |
To quote Kirk Tuck again, "Very few lenses are not sharp at f8!"
I agree with you. I have a number of 11x14 pictures on my walls that get lots of compliments. I have a few people ask what kind of camera was used as if that was the secret to a good picture. Or they think the camera was expensive. All my digital cameras have been on the lower end of the price range. A Nikon D5000 that worked good until I dropped it in the ocean and than a Nikon D700 with a kit lens and a Nikon 75-300 lens all bought as a factory refurbished items. I lusted after full frame cameras and longer lenses but never had the funds. Anyway after shooting for awhile I realized the quality of the images from the Nikon was superb and I didn't need pro lenses. Hurrah for cheap lenses.
ReplyDelete