Do you need good lens to take good pictures?

[KAE123]

No, they are beneficial to a sharp photo. NOT a good photo.

It is a common misconception that good camera = good pictures. What makes a great image, a top notch photo, lies behind the camera.

obviously i was referring to technical POV & exclude the artistic and other non revelant factor as sfoto100 sum up here. person behind the cam is taken out of the context here.

hi

For sake of this discussion , lets focus on image quality, and not on build (weather sealing, plastic mount or metal mount...)

Distortions
Vignetting
MTF (resolution)
Chromatic Aberrations (CAs)
Bokeh

Note: These 5 factors are what photozone.de uses to evaluate a lens.


tks to all

have a nice day!

 

[Rashkae]

hi

Interesting discussion... i would like to seek your opinion on lens also


For sake of this discussion , lets focus on image quality, and not on build (weather sealing, plastic mount or metal mount...)


Distortions
Vignetting
MTF (resolution)
Chromatic Aberrations (CAs)
Bokeh

Note: These 5 factors are what photozone.de uses to evaluate a lens.

Q1: Are there other factors outside these 5 that define image quality? If they are, what are these?

Q2: For resolution, the site defines what numbers are consider good, very good etc.. but nothing is define for Distortions, Vignetting, CA... Is there is kind of standard for these as well?


Franking speaking, the Canon kit lens 18-55 IS perform quite well, and i heard the nikon kit lens does well too. So I would consider these lens are good lens in my humble opinion, what do u guys think? Again, lens build is not being considered here, just image quality.


tks to all

have a nice day!

Please don't try to redirect the topic of this thread. We are talking about what makes a great picture, not what makes the sharpest image. Everything you brought up are technical aspects of the lens, which really does not impact a "great picture".

 

[Rashkae]

obviously i was referring to technical POV & exclude the artistic and other non revelant factor as sfoto100 sum up here. person behind the cam is taken out of the context here.

Do not redirect the topic of the thread. To do so is also known as trolling.

 

[Rashkae]

I think what t/s is asking is whether f3.5 is sufficient enough to be called a good lens? :dunno:

One has nothing to do with the other, really.

 

[sfoto100]

Please don't try to redirect the topic of this thread. We are talking about what makes a great picture, not what makes the sharpest image. Everything you brought up are technical aspects of the lens, which really does not impact a "great picture".

i beg to differ. The technical aspects do play a important part.

 

[wildcat]

Then why camera companies build good lens if it is the photographers that matter?

To cater to people who will ask "do you need good lens to take good pictures" :sweat:

 

[akangtooch]

:dunno::bigeyes:

 

[akangtooch]

"do you need good lens to take good pictures"

it is case to case basis....

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

Looks like a very meaningful discussion, and I'd like to add my 2 cents

To some extent, and in some cases, the lens does play a factor in one's ability to produce a "good" photo.
Off the top of my head, I'm thinking of sports photography (eg. English Premier League match).
Say... Fernando Torres scores a brilliant goal and is celebrating ecstatically by the touchline. With a large-aperture telephoto lens, one might be able to capture his emotion clearly as well as isolate him from the background.
It would probably not be possible to achieve this with a budget telephoto (eg. 70-300 f/4-5.6)...

That being said, a lot of the time I find that the really memorable photos are the ones which 'impact' you the moment you lay eyes on them. And sharpness isn't one of the factors that will make me immediately go 'wow' when I'm browsing through Flickr, Pbase, etc... Certainly composition, colours, lighting are greater contributory factors.

 

[scubagolfer]

Lets put it this way,

If you take an identical picture both

with lousy lens and / or with lousy body .... vs good lens and / or with good body

you will definitely get better picture with better lens/body

 

[scubagolfer]

By the way we shouldnt be comparing between a good and a bad photographer, we should be looking at whether the equipment will help a photographer take better pics

 

[Xtol19]

Do you need good lens to take good pictures?

Of course.

But you need to be good enough a photographer first.

No point driving a Ferrari if you don't even know how to drive a Subaru Impreza.

 

[mondocheesemonster]

this thread so fierce. but as many have said, it's the photographer, not his gear...

 

[catchlights]

I don't think TS will come back and tell us what is his definition of good pictures.

anyway, what do you guys think is the key ingredient of a good pictures?

sharpness?
contrast?
bokeh?

how about the theme/subject? how about composition? are these not important at all? you sure?

 

[Anthony Lee]

deng xiao ping said (directly translated), doesn't matter if the cat is white or black - the cat that catches the rat is a good cat.

This said it all. You guys still don't get it.

 

[catchlights]

good pictures have theme, carry message, communicate thoughts..... just like a novel

just imagine if one day a student ask his teacher during class,

student: teacher, please tell us how to write good composition..
teacher: first you must have good paper, something like Conqueror paper at least 210gsm, second, you need to have a good pen, at least a Parker, best is Montblanc......

 

[Dream Merchant]

I don't think TS will come back and tell us what is his definition of good pictures.

anyway, what do you guys think is the key ingredient of a good pictures?

sharpness?
contrast?
bokeh?

how about the theme/subject? how about composition? are these not important at all? you sure?

This said it all. You guys still don't get it.

Most don't get the point, because for some, the point don't exist in the first place. :bsmilie:

But even on a technical level, not many care about what really constitutes IQ and the factors affecting which. Over-corrected and over-contrasty means good.

 

[Dream Merchant]

good pictures have theme, carry message, communicate thoughts..... just like a novel

just imagine if one day a student ask his teacher during class,

student: teacher, please tell us how to write good composition..
teacher: first you must have good paper, something like Conqueror paper at least 210gsm, second, you need to have a good pen, at least a Parker, best is Montblanc......

Very rich school! :sweat:

 

[KAE123]

Everything you brought up are technical aspects of the lens, which really does not impact a "great picture".

that is excatly what I just said and we all agreed on that. photographer vs camera topic is still active below.

:bsmilie:lol....chill bro, not need for hard fist here. as the ropic is rather vague in nature and hence i merely breakdown for less threaded discussion.

 

[catchlights]

Very rich school! :sweat:

yo! if you have this typewriter, can you write the same like the it original owner??