Enlighten us about Lenses.

Thanks for that, markc, that was mostly what I was asking for :) . But like how about in the middle? Are there middle-quality lenses between maybe a stock kit lens that comes with a Canon Rebel and the L-series lenses (assuming you're comparing lenses of the same focal length)? Would they be worth it, or is it better to wait until youre pro enough to splurge on an expensive lens? And how about at 8x10 prints? The lens flaws must be more noticeable at a larger size, but significantly?
 
Unimaxium said:
Thanks for that, markc, that was mostly what I was asking for :) . But like how about in the middle? Are there middle-quality lenses between maybe a stock kit lens that comes with a Canon Rebel and the L-series lenses (assuming you're comparing lenses of the same focal length)? Would they be worth it, or is it better to wait until youre pro enough to splurge on an expensive lens? And how about at 8x10 prints? The lens flaws must be more noticeable at a larger size, but significantly?
ok, since you're using canon, the best place to ask about the lenses would be here:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9
Say hi. Say you're shooting rebel. Tell the guys what you wanna shoot, you'll get advice.

Is L worth it?
Yes. Every penny.

I don't have that kind of money, what should I get?
50/1.8 EF
Tamron 28-75 HS UD ULD SHR APO BLAH BLAH QUAH

www.photodo.com
3.5 and above is a very good lens. 4+ is top of the line.

http://www.photo.net/making-photographs/lens
http://www.jafaphotography.com/lenses.htm
http://www.garageglamour.com/tips/articles/lenses.php
http://www.canonians.com/mixed.htm

Cheers
 
Unimaxium said:
3) How can I drop "bokeh" into a conversation without sounding dorky?

You can say "out of focus elements" or "background highlights" or something instead. As a bonus, non-photoenthusiasts can understand you, unless they were knocked over the head or malnourished as children.
 
Unimaxium said:
1) What exactly defines a "prime" lens?
Fixed focal length. 17mm or 50mm or 35mm or 200mm etc are primes, 17-35mm and 28-200mm etc are zooms. You could also throw "wide" or "tele" in there for more specificity, e.g. 17-35mm wide zoom and 100-300mm telephoto zoom.


2) I've heard "L" (L-series?) lenses referred to a bit. What exactly are those? Just a brand name for a company's line of prime lenses? Or something?

Canon's professional lens series. Usually better optics, usually faster apertures (f/2.8 common, but there's an f/4 "L" zoom), and usually more strongly built. Also have some handy things like depth of field scales on the focusing scale, etc, that most consumer lenses don't have.


4) Exactly how great, on a scale of e (2.718) to pi (3.141), is the difference between a bad lens and a good lens?

To a beginner, almost exp(1). The "L" lens will look cooler hanging from your side when you step out of your mini cooper in front of your uptown condominium highrise, but it won't make your pictures better. As far as I'm concerned, the biggest quality issues with lenses are distortion (barrel and pincushion - ie a straight horizon becomes curved) and wide-open performance. It's nice to have a lens that is reasonably sharp at f/2, taking into account the small DOF (and has f/2 for that matter). I don't really know how a 'bad' lens compared to a 'good' lens in terms of sharpness, because I've never used a lens that gives unsharp pictures except when I've made a mistake. I've not used very many lenses though (a few point'n'shoots, my canon zoom, 50mm prime, a lubitel and a rolleiflex). They're all sharp enough for me under the right conditions. I'm not a professional though.

BTW, floor(e^pi) = 23. 23 is the magick number. Spooky.

5) When is it most beneficial to have a well-made lens (what kind of photography)? When might it be least necessary? Or is it maybe equally beneficial for any situation?

In my opinion, and again I'm an amateur, better lenses onlyh make sense for certain situations. A cheap 28-100 f/4ish zoom is great for hiking trips -why risk a $1500 piece of glass?. An expensive f/2.8 zoom is good for shooting indoor weddings and concerts, especially if you're getting paid for it. In general, if you can afford it, a better lens has the potential for technically better image quality, and will feel better in your hands, but if you can't afford it or can't justify it you'll probably do fine with a consumer lens. And anyway, until you're a photographic genius, you're way way more limiting than your lens is. I once read "swap your crappy camera with a professional's high-end system for a week and see who takes better pictures" as an example, and I think it's a good one.

6) Similar to #5, what kinds of lenses are good for what kinds of photography? This is another general question I know, but I'm not really expecting a completely comprehensive list of every lense with every branch of photography.

Fast lenses (f/2.8 to f/1.4) for available light photography and weddings and concerts and portraits (bokeh bokeh bokeh!), ultra-wide lenses and fisheyes for closeups of animals wearing silly hats, wide lenses for landscapes, standard prime lenses (eg. 50mm) for street shots / candid stuff (normal perspective, small and light), short telephoto lenses (80 or 100mm) for portraits, long telephoto lenses (300, 500mm, etc) with tripod mounts for wildlife, wide lenses for landscape, macro lenses for bumblebees and water drops, versatile cheap and light 28-200 or 28-300 zoom lenses for vacations in spain and trans-europe backpacking train trips :)

7) Why exactly do lenses in digital cameras have "35mm equivalent" focal lengths? I know that the size of the CCD/CMOS chip is different from a 35mm frame, but wouldn't this simply produce a crop rather than a difference in effective focal length?

No, you're right, it is only a crop factor. You're not changing the focal length, you're changing the effective field of view. Hence the field of view of a 35mm lens becomes that of approximately a 50mm lens if you're SLR has a 1.6x crop factor. Because most people from 35mm photography can think in terms of what sort of field of view a lens of a certain focal length will give, the 35mm equivalent "focal lengths" are listed. It's easier than saying "87 to 12 degree field of view zoom lens!" in advertising brochures :)
 

Most reactions

Back
Top