Glad to know that I am not alone on the list. As a chinese who have the
chance to read both English and Japanese magazines, I have found the printed
photos were very different. In Japanese photo magazines, there is always the
"smoothness" quality which is rare in US and UK magazines. I think that's
when I started to notice the difference and refined "quality". Especially
the one called "Photo Technic".
regards,
Alan Chan
>Bravo, Alan!
>
>You know, I don't ever recall much discussion about lens tests when
>I was doing photography many years ago. While sometimes the
>qualities of one lens or another was discussed, it seemed that most
>photographers just used lenses they liked for whatever reasons they
>had. They made photographs and they were happy. Now, it seems,
>times have changed. More people seem to make their choices of photo
>gear based on test results - which, in all cases, are interpretive
>and far from perfect indicators of overall lens performance.
>
>I made a decision to use Pentax gear because I liked the way the
>cameras and the lenses felt. My girlfriend used Nikon gear because
>she liked some of the features it offered. Some of her lenses were
>excellent, and may have been "better" than some of my lenses.
>Frankly, we didn't give a rat's ass - we just made photographs,
>burned film, printed in the darkroom, and enjoyed ourselves.
>
>I recall that Elliott Erwitt had one of his Leicas set up with an
>older, "optically inferior" lens, because the lens was collapsible,
>and allowed him to carry the camera more easily in his pockets. He
>knew that if he couldn't easily carry the camera, he may not carry
>it at all, and miss many photo opportunities.
>
>So, while all of these people argue and discuss resolution,
>contrast, lines per millimeter, and whether the A* this is better
>than the FA that, others are out shooting with their plastic
>"optical" lenses and are at least making photographs. Further, some
>folks it seems are busy arguing about the quality of lenses they
>don't even own, or may not have used.
>--
>Shel Belinkoff
>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>There are no rules for good photographs,
>there are only good photographs.
>
>Alan Chan wrote:
> >
> > I am just an amateur who is not interested in test report (I used to
>read a
> > lot though). I had the FA*85/1.4 and now have the FA77/1.8. For
>portraits, I
> > have found the FA77/1.8 produces smoother and more natural results than
>the
> > FA*85/1.4 which had serious "bright-ring" bokeh in some situations (So
>to
> > the F*300/4.5). When talking about lens performance, I have found that
>most
> > people would concern contrast and resolution mainly. When in fact,
> > resolution and contrast alone do not determine the overal quality of any
> > lens. A super sharp lens does not necessily produce better result. I
>think
> > what I have tried to say is, sometimes, the naturalness of the result is
> > just as important. And I don't know if any test would be able to
>evaluate
> > this unique quality.
>-
>This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
>go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
>visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
>
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
