A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital SLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

fast glass?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 9th 06, 04:56 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fast glass?

everyone seems to want 'fast glass' - f/2.8, 1.7, 1.4, etc, but I'm left
wondering 'why' As most people know, lenses are not at their sharpest wide
open - usually requiring f/7 - 9 (ish) before they attain their maximum
potential.

So why the fuss about 'fast' lenses?, and why pay the huge premiums to own
them? Most of my own lenses are 2.8, with one at 1.7, and one at 1.4 - yet
I invariably have to stop down in order to get a nicely sharp image, which
sort of defeats the object of the 'fast glass', doesn't it?

I mean, why pay three times the price for a 'fast' lens, when you only end
up stopping it down? I've got a theory that it's the mania for bright lenses
that's behind a lot of the 'focus fuss' that clogs up the various forums -
perhaps people don't realise that you're just not going to get the same
image quality out of wide open lens and are mistaking 'softness' for focus
issues. Just a thought.


  #2  
Old January 9th 06, 05:04 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fast glass?

In article , Danny
wrote:

Just a thought.


Just a thought. Read a basic book about photography.

--
Charles
  #3  
Old January 9th 06, 05:05 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fast glass?


"Charles" wrote in message
...
In article , Danny
wrote:

Just a thought.


Just a thought. Read a basic book about photography.



Why is their always a smart-arse on every Usenet group? - don't you have a
****ing job to go to?


  #4  
Old January 9th 06, 05:12 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fast glass?

Danny wrote:
everyone seems to want 'fast glass' - f/2.8, 1.7, 1.4, etc, but I'm left
wondering 'why' As most people know, lenses are not at their sharpest wide
open - usually requiring f/7 - 9 (ish) before they attain their maximum
potential.

So why the fuss about 'fast' lenses?, and why pay the huge premiums to own
them? Most of my own lenses are 2.8, with one at 1.7, and one at 1.4 - yet
I invariably have to stop down in order to get a nicely sharp image, which
sort of defeats the object of the 'fast glass', doesn't it?

I mean, why pay three times the price for a 'fast' lens, when you only end
up stopping it down? I've got a theory that it's the mania for bright lenses
that's behind a lot of the 'focus fuss' that clogs up the various forums -
perhaps people don't realise that you're just not going to get the same
image quality out of wide open lens and are mistaking 'softness' for focus
issues. Just a thought.


Danny,
I agree with you in the short focal length range. But even then there
are situations where the aberrations wide open are acceptable in order
to get the shot. For example, a low lit room with no flash.
I generally image landscapes at about f/8 to f/11 for maximum depth
of field and image sharpness, when I do small formats (35mm, DSLRs).

But in the super telephoto range, the lenses are designed to
deliver very high quality images without stopping down.
Look at the 300 mm f/2.8, 400 mm f/2.8, 500 mm f/4 and 600 mm f/4
lenses. They have spectacular performance wide open, and you
need it for action shots.

Roger
Example on my web site, see bid and bear galleries:
http://www.clarkvision.com
  #5  
Old January 9th 06, 05:12 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fast glass?

Danny wrote:
"Charles" wrote in message
...
In article , Danny
wrote:

Just a thought.

Just a thought. Read a basic book about photography.



Why is their always a smart-arse on every Usenet group? - don't you have a
****ing job to go to?


That should have read *there* not /their/
_____
Slack - smart-arse #2
  #6  
Old January 9th 06, 05:16 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fast glass?

In article , Danny
wrote:

Why is their always a smart-arse on every Usenet group?


I meant what I said. Read some basic photography books and you will
understand why we need fast glass.

--
Charles
  #7  
Old January 9th 06, 05:18 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fast glass?


"Danny" wrote in message
...
everyone seems to want 'fast glass' - f/2.8, 1.7, 1.4, etc, but I'm left
wondering 'why' As most people know, lenses are not at their sharpest
wide open - usually requiring f/7 - 9 (ish) before they attain their
maximum potential.


1. There are cases when they are used in low light.
2. You can say: "My lens is better than your lens"


perhaps people don't realise that you're just not going to get the same
image quality out of wide open lens and are mistaking 'softness' for focus
issues. Just a thought.


Sure they do. Read #2 above I have a 1.8 lens on my OM-2. I can't think a
single time that I really would have been better of with a 1.4. But I have
used it wide open.
--
Ed
http://pages.cthome.net/edhome/


  #8  
Old January 9th 06, 05:18 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fast glass?

Hmm---my very cheap Canon f/1.8 50mm does a nice job of available light
gathering in a gym--my much costlier 28-135 IS 3.5-5.6 needs flash,
which I try to avoid for indoor sports!

Paul B.

sample: http://scienceteacher.biz/VBweb/IMG_0322.html

  #9  
Old January 9th 06, 05:31 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fast glass?


wrote in message
ups.com...
Hmm---my very cheap Canon f/1.8 50mm does a nice job of available light
gathering in a gym--my much costlier 28-135 IS 3.5-5.6 needs flash,
which I try to avoid for indoor sports!



It must be my lenses! Sure, I can get low light shots (not that I take
many) but my own fetish is for sharpness and I just can't bear to put up
with a soft image, knowing that dialling down a bit and using flash (if
allowed, of course) will produce a much better shot.



  #10  
Old January 9th 06, 05:32 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default fast glass?



Danny wrote:
everyone seems to want 'fast glass' - f/2.8, 1.7, 1.4, etc, but I'm left
wondering 'why' As most people know, lenses are not at their sharpest wide
open - usually requiring f/7 - 9 (ish) before they attain their maximum
potential.

So why the fuss about 'fast' lenses?, and why pay the huge premiums to own
them? Most of my own lenses are 2.8, with one at 1.7, and one at 1.4 - yet
I invariably have to stop down in order to get a nicely sharp image, which
sort of defeats the object of the 'fast glass', doesn't it?

I mean, why pay three times the price for a 'fast' lens, when you only end
up stopping it down? I've got a theory that it's the mania for bright lenses
that's behind a lot of the 'focus fuss' that clogs up the various forums -
perhaps people don't realise that you're just not going to get the same
image quality out of wide open lens and are mistaking 'softness' for focus
issues. Just a thought.


Just think of the "Bragging Rights" that come with the purchase.
Isn't that what life is all about? G
Bob Williams

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Making Stained Glass at home, help Frank in UK Digital Photography 1 February 8th 05 01:58 PM
Making Stained Glass at home, help starlia 35mm Photo Equipment 0 February 8th 05 01:58 PM
Making Stained Glass at home, help Frank in UK 35mm Photo Equipment 0 February 8th 05 01:04 PM
Heat absorbing glass or one-size-fits all glass carrier for 23CII negative popping problem Phil Glaser In The Darkroom 2 June 1st 04 01:47 PM
Filter glass for Janpol enlarging lens? Donald Qualls In The Darkroom 7 May 29th 04 11:32 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.