Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated?

dpreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 291 posts

Re: Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated?

#71

Post by twalla »

azhenley wrote: post #49
tyho wrote: post #44

I recently got back into photography after a decade break. Brought a nice mirrorless camera and a few good lenses (Sony A7iii, 24-105 f/4, 35mm f/1.8). I was truly blown away at the progress that has been made in handheld imaging. The difference between my old Cannon EOS 450d and my current equipment is immense. What has happened to the iPhone camera in the last 10 years has also happened to handheld cameras too, but…

Great camera. Don't discount the 3rd party E-mount lens makers, such as Samyang. If you are unsure what to get next, I suggest looking at this list of every E-mount full-frame lens: https://briansmith.com/sony-a7-a7r-a7s-lens-guide/

If you want to go even deeper down the rabbithole the Alphas are also great manual lens platforms.

https://phillipreeve.net/blog/manual-lenses-sony-a7/

Plus, a comprehensive list from the same folks for all the E mount lenses:

https://phillipreeve.net/blog/fe-lenses-sony-comprehensive-i...

Re: Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated?

#72

Post by 74d-fe6-2c6 »

ben7799 wrote: post #37

I love 50mm lenses but a lot of this stuff is ridiculously academic since photography is artistic & creative in nature. DPreview largely seems to write for the crowd that doesn't even care about the art aspect and just wants validation that they have better photo gear than others. These new 50mm lenses often defeat the point cause they're enormous, heavy, very expensive, and have little benefit over the slower versio…

beginners care about cameras, amateurs care about lenses, pros care about motifs.

Re: Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated?

#73

Post by Sharlin »

ben7799 wrote: post #37

I love 50mm lenses but a lot of this stuff is ridiculously academic since photography is artistic & creative in nature. DPreview largely seems to write for the crowd that doesn't even care about the art aspect and just wants validation that they have better photo gear than others. These new 50mm lenses often defeat the point cause they're enormous, heavy, very expensive, and have little benefit over the slower versio…

> DPreview largely seems to write for the crowd that doesn't even care about the art aspect and just wants validation that they have better photo gear than others.

To be fair, the author of this article is Roger Cicala of LensRentals fame [1]; optical testing is his bread and butter. He's also the first to point out that optimal lens performance is neither necessary nor sufficient for good photography, and is famously snarky in his writing towards "spec sheet warriors" and sharpness-obsessed gearheads.

[1] https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/author/roger/

Re: Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated?

#74

Post by dheera »

dylan604 wrote: post #55
dheera wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly, I tried several modern Canon lenses about 8-10 years ago and very quickly sold them because they were all not only producing subpar images compared to almost all my lenses from the 1960s-1980s, but they were also made of f-ing plastic and had an incredible amount of backlash in the rings.

Canon's L-series (red bands) have metal casings. The glass is also nicer, the barrels are rated much higher for dust/moisture protection. This is reflected in their much higher price tags.

I tried a couple L lenses and they were plastic, felt cheap as fuck, and horribly difficult to focus. Even tried a 50mm f/1.2 L and returned it within an hour of unboxing it. That thing, despite costing 3X as much, felt like a cheap toy in comparison to a Rokkor 58/1.2 or a Nikkor 50/1.2 (both of which are 1/3 of the price in perfect condition), and at the end of the day I still liked the rendition and hand feel of my Contax-Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 slightly better.

I don't use autofocus, pretty much ever, so that isn't a consideration. But I do want quality precision mechanics, and I feel that shouldn't be much to ask for.

My old lenses feel like quality scientific instruments, in comparison, and have long focus throws that allow me to focus very accurately.

I now own a Canon body and zero Canon lenses except for an FD 300/2.8 that I modified to fit EF.

Re: Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated?

#75

Post by cratermoon »

spoonjim wrote: post #45

I’ll save you a click: this article basically says “to make them better.” Little explanation of what the elements do.

"better" is subjective, though. They design the lens to meet certain technical criteria[1] for minimizing distortion, spherical and chromatic aberration, flare, diffraction, etc. They are optically near perfect. But are they better, really? Better than classic Leica Summicrons, Kodak Ektars, Schneider Xenars, Rodenstock Grandagon-Ns, or a Speed Graphic retrofitted with a 1940s 7" (185mm) Aero Ektar?

[1]https://lightartacademy.com/tutorials/defects-in-lenses-all-...

Re: Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated?

#76

Post by azhenley »

twalla wrote: post #71
azhenley wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great camera. Don't discount the 3rd party E-mount lens makers, such as Samyang. If you are unsure what to get next, I suggest looking at this list of every E-mount full-frame lens: https://briansmith.com/sony-a7-a7r-a7s-lens-guide/

If you want to go even deeper down the rabbithole the Alphas are also great manual lens platforms. https://phillipreeve.net/blog/manual-lenses-sony-a7/ Plus, a comprehensive list from the same folks for all the E mount lenses: https://phillipreeve.net/blog/fe-lenses-sony-comprehensive-i...

Definitely. I recommend grabbing a Helios-44 58mm off eBay and a cheap adapter from Amazon.

Re: Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated?

#77

Post by Matrixik »

azhenley wrote: post #49
tyho wrote: post #44

I recently got back into photography after a decade break. Brought a nice mirrorless camera and a few good lenses (Sony A7iii, 24-105 f/4, 35mm f/1.8). I was truly blown away at the progress that has been made in handheld imaging. The difference between my old Cannon EOS 450d and my current equipment is immense. What has happened to the iPhone camera in the last 10 years has also happened to handheld cameras too, but…

Great camera. Don't discount the 3rd party E-mount lens makers, such as Samyang. If you are unsure what to get next, I suggest looking at this list of every E-mount full-frame lens: https://briansmith.com/sony-a7-a7r-a7s-lens-guide/

And Tamron. Everyone remembering Tamron from 10 years ago looks at me as if I'm insane for using Tamron zooms (that was all released in last 2-3 years) on Sony A7 III. Then I show them end results and they are making big eyes. They are sharp and looking really good. As good as best Sony zooms or Sigma? No, but really close and cheaper.

I'm looking now to buy Tamron 28-200 that is basically best super zoom available on any system (including first party zooms). Excellent for vacations.

Re: Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated?

#78

Post by hrktb »

ben7799 wrote: post #37

I love 50mm lenses but a lot of this stuff is ridiculously academic since photography is artistic & creative in nature. DPreview largely seems to write for the crowd that doesn't even care about the art aspect and just wants validation that they have better photo gear than others. These new 50mm lenses often defeat the point cause they're enormous, heavy, very expensive, and have little benefit over the slower versio…

Would you make the same line of comment on a anandtech chipset review, arguing it's ridiculously technical and doesn't take into account the art of progamming ?

I am pretty glad dpreview does these kind of technical reviews, it nicely completes other photographer reviews who'll dig more on the experience and real world impact side of things.

Re: Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated?

#79

Post by formerly_proven »

cratermoon wrote: post #48
ben7799 wrote: post #37

I love 50mm lenses but a lot of this stuff is ridiculously academic since photography is artistic & creative in nature. DPreview largely seems to write for the crowd that doesn't even care about the art aspect and just wants validation that they have better photo gear than others. These new 50mm lenses often defeat the point cause they're enormous, heavy, very expensive, and have little benefit over the slower versio…

> DPReview largely seems to write for the crowd that doesn't even care about the art aspect and just wants validation that they have better photo gear than others. DPReview, FStoppers, PetaPixel, and back in before the web the Popular Photography and Modern Photography magazines. There's a big market for prosumer gear that costs a lot, has ideal technical specs, and hangs around the owner's neck like a prize. Of cour…

DPReview seems to have rather balanced reporting (I'm not a regular reader), so they do seem to be at least somewhat independent of being directly sponsored by whoever they're reviewing at the time. Compare this to pretty much every photo-vlogger/blogger/grammer out there, which have massive audiences while making unclear claims of independence and un-biasedness while shilling very hard.

Re: Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated?

#80

Post by dagmx »

Matrixik wrote: post #77
azhenley wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great camera. Don't discount the 3rd party E-mount lens makers, such as Samyang. If you are unsure what to get next, I suggest looking at this list of every E-mount full-frame lens: https://briansmith.com/sony-a7-a7r-a7s-lens-guide/

And Tamron. Everyone remembering Tamron from 10 years ago looks at me as if I'm insane for using Tamron zooms (that was all released in last 2-3 years) on Sony A7 III. Then I show them end results and they are making big eyes. They are sharp and looking really good. As good as best Sony zooms or Sigma? No, but really close and cheaper. I'm looking now to buy Tamron 28-200 that is basically best super zoom available o…

Second the recommendation for Tamron. I have their 70-200 f/2.8 with stabilization. It's amazing, especially for the price.

I shoot concerts with it on an A7ii. The lens is great. The camera body however is showing its age which is unfortunate, but I'll upgrade in a generation or two.

Post reply on HN