Do consider things like bokeh(only fast lens can)...
maybe the word good is too GENERAL?
imo, u dont need gd lens to take gd photos. u also dun need damn gd cameras to take gd pictures too. i think the equipment are just a means to get the photo, so gd equipment just makes it easier to take photos under more restricted conditions. i've seen very nice photos taken with even disposable cameras.
crap lens that barely works with a skilled photog will produce ok pics, if the glass is utter crap then of course the pics will look like utter crap, howevr if its in gd condition then it depends on the skill of the photog, but i have voted yes.
By crap i mean cracked/scratched etc, of course well skilled photogs should be able to us most lenses to produce good pics
Last edited by wildstallion; 8th March 2006 at 08:44 PM.
before u ever think of getting a gd lens ... have u ever ask yrself whats a good picture to u , yrself and to other people ?
A good lens allows you more flexibility(like in the case of large aperture lenses) and also makes sure you can worry less about technicalities like sharpness, bokeh, etc. and worry more about things like composition and exposure which matter way more than sharpness or colour.
i'd say, a decent lens a necessary. well, thats what i think. not that i have a dslr :P
Good equipment helps, but is not a must. There are a lot of good photos from times when photographic equipment was utterly primitive and lousy by today's standards.
sometimes good lenses/cameras are needed to even be able to take an acceptable photo. too many times i see people shooting with digital compacts on silent night only to produce white faces with black backgrounds.
good can be technically good(which requires good gear) or creatively good(which only needs camera phones)
generally, a good photo needs to be at least technically well taken, so reasonably good gear is needed.
Last edited by roti_prata; 8th March 2006 at 08:59 PM.
Put a good brain behind the eye, behind the eyepiece and the lens can be what ever it likes.
Time, is an effortless construction :)
No but it helps, I think.
Some lenses give such rich and vibrant colors without any ps work.
It takes away the need to know the behaviour of the lens and mentally adjust for it.
There is more latitude, in that, it is more forgiving even if the photographer is not so good.
Of course for the long teles, there is nothing more satisfying than a fast and sharp lens without any chromatic aberrations etc.
My 5 cents conclusion: L lenses still my choice!
ppl tend to get too philosophical when discussing such topics
r u saying tt less experienced photographers should not be able to take photos?Originally Posted by eng_keow
Good lens not necessary but,
Bad lens will unlikely to produce very good pictures and,
Good lens make it much easier to take good pictures - consistently.
Hum Do you need good camera, good film, good lighting, creative eye, a working brain, the right moment, good communication skill and off course GOOD LENES. YES to all the above
No. The best equipment is found 2 inches from the lens...
yes and no