Gear mania
Jan Rifkinson said:
What are your favorite lenses?
Hi Jan,
You'll notice that this topic had generated a lot of response. When it comes to gear photographers fall into three camps:
1) Those that love photography for the image. The technical aspects of which lens is best isn't relevant - a fantasic image with a rubbish lens will always be better than a mediocre image with a great lens. It's the eye of the photographer that's important. Many of those in this group (but by no means all) are creative but not technically inclined - in the end their photography will be limited by their own lack of knowledge because despite everything photography does have a technical learning curve that must be overcome if we are to excel.
2) Those that are more technically oriented and love gear and gagets in general, often at the expense of the image. Having a huge collection of gear is important to these photographers because they are passionate the tecnicalities of photography. Taking photos is often an afterthought! Without these people photography would never have arrived where it has today, and there are many photographers who unashamedly put themself in this category. Where would we be without Doug Kerr's incredible insight?
3) Finally there are those who are lucky enough to have a technical understanding of the tools of their trade and a creative eye for the art of photography. They will be passionate about the gear that they use, but without the image as the end goal photography for them would hold no interest. I believe that in today's times most top photographers are forcably in this category.
Forums typically attract the technically minded, and most photograph forums are heavily overloaded with gear freaks and terrible photos. OPF is has tried hard to break that mould and offer a forum that's oriented towards the image itself. Despite this, it's interesting to see that as soon as the opportunity is offered to discuss gear everyone jumps on the band wagon!
Jan Rifkinson said:
I'm sort of frustrated because it seems like canon produces these great cameras but falls short in the lens dept.
That's a little unfair. I personally think that Canon have the most impressive range of lenses available, catering admirably for both the amateur and professional alike. I chose Canon because of their range of lenses, not because of their bodies.
Jan Rifkinson said:
I'm not a pro that can afford a lot of f1.2 lenses but I'm willing to save for one if it's worth it while I trudge along w my 28-105 f3.5 & 70-300is f4.5, both of which leave something to be desired. Of the two I favor the 28-105 because of its size + at 8mgpxl, I can crop for cu(s) or ecu(s) if I can't get my camera into the right position.
Although not obvious to the beginner, the difference between consumer lenses and pro lenses is substantial. I still have an old 70-300 in the cupboard - I tried it again the other day because I needed a telephoto, and put it straightback again - it really was terrible (I believe the lastest model is far more respectable). The reality of the situation is that good lenses are a pleasure to use, and they deliver the results. I can understand your deception - I'll just have to wait until I can afford a decent telephoto.
My philosphy now is wait till I can afford what I want. Personally I would rather have a few very good, well chosen lenses than a massive collection of medicre ones. There's no reason however to target only the L's - there are many superb lenses in Canon's lineup that offer excellent optics for much less money than the L equivalents (the 50mm 1.4, the 85mm 1.8, etc).
My advice is to stay away from the cheap consumer zooms. Most of Canon's primes are excellent - L or otherwise, and are similary priced to the cheaper zooms. I also agree with others here that primes help develop photographuc skills.
The L zooms are in the top of their class - if that's where your needs lie then they are probable worth saving for. There are also a few non-L zooms that are optically as good, if not better, than the L's (the 17-55mm 2.8 EF-S comes to mind).
My personal need is for wide open apertures, for that reason I prefer primes, since zooms only go down to 2.8. Nevertheless, I shan't be buying any 1.2's until I win the lottery!
Tim