The PR war

[Martin Kristiansen]

Martin, I'm sitting in a restaurant having lunch, hence the iPad which I love, but which is not easy to use in a hurry.

Let me just say that your last paragraph in no way states the spirit of what I think I expressed in my post.

I wasn’t being clear. Essentially I agree with you. With what you had written. I then added my take on the matter and was making a general comment on the current tendency of fast glass and shallow depth of field.

[BJL]

No, I'd say look is far more complex than simple mechanical trickery. More is it a manifestation of mind, of how a person views his/her universe which, through photography, becomes somewhat more flexible a concept than through the prism of the naked eye.

Rob, thanks for your reply; I should have qualified that I was thinking of discussions about the "look" or "rendition" or "drawing" inherent in a lens (or a film), not what is achieved by the artistic choices and tendencies of the photographer.  I am inclined to the position that you seemed to take in a recent discussion: that with digital, it is usually fine for the lens to simply give an accurate rendition, with the "looks" once sought from lens idiosyncrasies now mostly* achievable in post-processing. Sort of "Lomography vs Photoshoppery".


(*) Not always of course; for example, blurring of backgrounds and foregrounds in software is not yet a match for doing it with large apertures, though we are heading there as can be seen at the vanguard of photographic technological innovation, meaning smart phones.

[BernardLanguillier]

There is a philosophical line btwn an image whose look is the result of lens design vs a post processing.

This impacts the way lenses are designed:
- lenses designed to have a character (Nikon 58mm f1.4 circular bokeh,...)
- lenses designed with some uncorrected aberations (most classic designs) because they didn’t know how to do better
- lenses designed to have a neutral rendering (most recent Canon designs, MF lenses,...)

These choices have large impacts on the look of images and many people in Japan consider this as a very important aspect of photography. Not to say essential.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Rob C]

There is a philosophical line btwn an image whose look is the result of lens design vs a post processing.

This impacts the way lenses are designed:
- lenses designed to have a character (Nikon 58mm f1.4 circular bokeh,...)
- lenses designed with some uncorrected aberations (most classic designs) because they didn’t know how to do better
- lenses designed to have a neutral rendering (most recent Canon designs, MF lenses,...)

These choices have large impacts on the look of images and many people in Japan consider this as a very important aspect of photography. Not to say essential.

Cheers,
Bernard

As they used to say in the record business: it's big in Japan.

;-)

[eronald]

As they used to say in the record business: it's big in Japan.

;-)

Yeah, and that as the french would say qualifies as breetish humour.


Edmund

[BJL]

- lenses designed to have a character (Nikon 58mm f1.4 circular bokeh,...)
- lenses designed with some uncorrected aberations (most classic designs) because they didn’t know how to do better
- lenses designed to have a neutral rendering (most recent Canon designs, MF lenses,...)

Bokeh is a very legitimate one: given that big OOF blurs are not part of the original scene anyway, there is plenty or room for esthetic choices in their shape and whether they fade towards the edge or have a bright "corona".

However I do not see that the nature of a lens's bokeh affects one way or another whether it has a "neutral" (i.e. "undistorted" or "accurate") rendering.

[BernardLanguillier]

Bokeh is a very legitimate one: given that big OOF blurs are not part of the original scene anyway, there is plenty or room for esthetic choices in their shape and whether they fade towards the edge or have a bright "corona".

However I do not see that the nature of a lens's bokeh affects one way or another whether it has a "neutral" (i.e. "undistorted" or "accurate") rendering.

What I refer to here as "neutral bokeh" is close to what you get in PS when you apply a Gauss blur filter.

What Japanese refer to when they speak about lens rendering also includes CA, astigmatism,...

cheers,
Bernard

[Rob C]

Yeah, and that as the french would say qualifies as breetish humour.


Edmund

Yeah, it lends a special bouquet bokeh to life.

Rob

[Telecaster]

I like lenses that force a photograph to look like it was taken with a camera. 

-Dave-

[BernardLanguillier]

At the risk of bringing this back to equipment talk, I recommend the following article from Thom Hogan for Nikon users. I own the 6 top lenses he is referring to and I couldn't agree more. Except for the 200mm f2 G that is of course older, the remaining 5 happen to be among the latest Nikon releases and show the level of excellence they are now able to achieve consistently.

Among the cheaper lenses, I also own the 24mm f1.8 and 85mm f1.8 and these 2 are real gems.

http://dslrbodies.com/lenses/lens-articles/choosing-lenses/my-five-favorite-nikkors.html

Cheers,
Bernard

[NancyP]

RobC, that's why I suggested that lens #2 for a neophyte with an APS-C camera should be an inexpensive "nifty fifty" with f/1.8, at 60 to 80 USD for the Canon version, presumably similar for the Nikon version.

I use Canon examples because I have followed Canon low-end camera technology, and simply don't know much about Nikon cheapo used APS-C DSLRs. So, Nikon experts, what would be your best 800 to 1000 USD Nikon used kit that includes APS-C DSLR camera, normal zoom, and nifty fifty?

As for "look", sometimes aberrations can be a feature. Every once in a while I take out an old fast 50mm film-era lens with double Gauss design - plenty of aberration wide open, but also some character. The AIS Nikkor 50 f/1.2 is fun for this. I also occasionally take out my dad's old AIS Nikkor 105 mm f/2.5 - nice look, not as sharp as the sharpest modern lens.

[hogloff]

At the risk of bringing this back to equipment talk, I recommend the following article from Thom Hogan for Nikon users. I own the 6 top lenses he is referring to and I couldn't agree more. Except for the 200mm f2 G that is of course older, the remaining 5 happen to be among the latest Nikon releases and show the level of excellence they are now able to achieve consistently.

Among the cheaper lenses, I also own the 24mm f1.8 and 85mm f1.8 and these 2 are real gems.

http://dslrbodies.com/lenses/lens-articles/choosing-lenses/my-five-favorite-nikkors.html

Cheers,
Bernard

So...what's that got to do with Canon kicking Nikon's butt in sales?

[BernardLanguillier]

So...what's that got to do with Canon kicking Nikon's butt in sales?

Whatever you want to read in it.

Cheers,
Bernard

[BernardLanguillier]

So, Nikon experts, what would be your best 800 to 1000 USD Nikon used kit that includes APS-C DSLR camera, normal zoom, and nifty fifty?

A second hand Nikon D7200 has MF like DR and can be had cheap.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Alex Waugh]

At the risk of bringing this back to equipment talk, I recommend the following article from Thom Hogan for Nikon users. I own the 6 top lenses he is referring to and I couldn't agree more. Except for the 200mm f2 G that is of course older, the remaining 5 happen to be among the latest Nikon releases and show the level of excellence they are now able to achieve consistently.

Among the cheaper lenses, I also own the 24mm f1.8 and 85mm f1.8 and these 2 are real gems.

http://dslrbodies.com/lenses/lens-articles/choosing-lenses/my-five-favorite-nikkors.html

Cheers,
Bernard

I far prefer the look of Nikkors but I wish they were built as well as Canon L glass. I assist / digital tech quite a few photographers and well used Nikons are always in far, far worse shape physically than their Canon counterparts.

Canons are a bit boring but they also don't have idiosyncrasies like the reversed focus / zoom rings on the 70-200 or the old AF system on the 105mm. I feel like a bit of each Nikkor recently has been unnecessarily compromised in some way, most likely due to recent financial strain. Canon will inevitably equal these lenses in resolution if not overall rendering with none of the surprises.

Also - the size of the new 24-70 - oof.

Edit - I shoot Nikon.

[BernardLanguillier]

I far prefer the look of Nikkors but I wish they were built as well as Canon L glass. I assist / digital tech quite a few photographers and well used Nikons are always in far, far worse shape physically than their Canon counterparts.

Canons are a bit boring but they also don't have idiosyncrasies like the reversed focus / zoom rings on the 70-200 or the old AF system on the 105mm. I feel like a bit of each Nikkor recently has been unnecessarily compromised in some way, most likely due to recent financial strain. Canon will inevitably equal these lenses in resolution if not overall rendering with none of the surprises.

Also - the size of the new 24-70 - oof.

Don't know how they are treating their lenses. I don't pay special attention, use my lenses a lot in various unkind locations and most of them look brand new.

I personally find the reversed rings on the 70-200 f2.8 a great feature, I never touch the focusing ring and it is much more stable to hold the lens by its zoom ring since it is located farther from the body. The only thing that takes some getting used to is the reversed order compared to the 24-70 f2.8 E FL, but that is a matter of days with a normally constituted brain IMHO. I used both lenses exclusively for a week last year and after 2 days I was fine.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Alex Waugh]

Don't know how they are treating their lenses. I don't pay special attention, use my lenses a lot in various unkind locations and most of them look brand new.

I personally find the reversed rings on the 70-200 f2.8 a great feature, I never touch the focusing ring and it is much more stable to hold the lens by its zoom ring since it is located farther from the body. The only thing that takes some getting used to is the reversed order compared to the 24-70 f2.8 E FL, but that is a matter of days with a normally constituted brain IMHO. I used both lenses exclusively for a week last year and after 2 days I was fine.

Cheers,
Bernard

You are the first person I've known that doesn't heavily dislike the reversed zoom/focus. As for the other photographers they are just regular, busy fashion people. I do love the new 28mm though its probably my pick of the bunch.

[BernardLanguillier]

You are the first person I've known that doesn't heavily dislike the reversed zoom/focus. As for the other photographers they are just regular, busy fashion people. I do love the new 28mm though its probably my pick of the bunch.

I know that many a photographer dislike it, bit I don’t get it, this is a minor change for me.

I guess it may be a matter of how used one is to reworking muscle memory.

But objectively speaking it is much more logical this way. And this does clearly contribute to the amazing level of real world sharpness this lens delivers consistently. If my Leica R 180mm f2.8 APO were not lighter and more compact I would have sold it already. The Nikon zoom equals or beats the best 180mm prime ever designed...

Agreed on the 28mm f1.4, one of my most used lens.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Rob C]

RobC, that's why I suggested that lens #2 for a neophyte with an APS-C camera should be an inexpensive "nifty fifty" with f/1.8, at 60 to 80 USD for the Canon version, presumably similar for the Nikon version.

I use Canon examples because I have followed Canon low-end camera technology, and simply don't know much about Nikon cheapo used APS-C DSLRs. So, Nikon experts, what would be your best 800 to 1000 USD Nikon used kit that includes APS-C DSLR camera, normal zoom, and nifty fifty?

As for "look", sometimes aberrations can be a feature. Every once in a while I take out an old fast 50mm film-era lens with double Gauss design - plenty of aberration wide open, but also some character. The AIS Nikkor 50 f/1.2 is fun for this. I also occasionally take out my dad's old AIS Nikkor 105 mm f/2.5 - nice look, not as sharp as the sharpest modern lens.

Nancy, I don't mean to be rude, but I can't quite see to which of my posts you are responding, so I can't really reply in turn!

Rob

[armand]

A second hand Nikon D7200 has MF like DR and can be had cheap.

Cheers,
Bernard

I’m not the most up to date with their latest offerings but this sounds about right.

As for the lenses, 18-55 or 18-140 for zooms and 35 1.8 DX for prime. I used to use primarily the 16-85 (now replaced by 16-80) but they are above your budget, I do wish Fuji would bring a similar lens for their APS-C.