(embiggenable) • iPhone
(embiggenable) • iPhone
(embiggenable) • iPhone
NOT LONG AGO THERE WAS A SPATE OF JIBBER JABBER-minus the rapidity-about lenses...the "perfect" portrait lens, corner sharpness, Leica lenses vs every other lens maker in the known photo universe, the ever popular debate about the aesthetic quality of the blur produced in out-of-focus parts of an image (aka:bokeh), etc./etc....true gearhead / fan boy stuff. However there was one statement*-made by the Mother-Of-All-Gearheads-which caught my attention:
"...the powerful lure of Leica legend always makes me wonder if their lens will supply just that tiny bit more 'edge' or 'magic' that will elevate images and make each image sweeter." ~ he/she who shall remain nameless
To my way of picture making thinking, if a picture maker is wishing for a lens that gives his/her pictures a "bit more edge or magic"/ "sweatness", then, iMo (and experience), that picture maker must be making some pretty lame pictures. Or, as Sir Ansel was said to state:
"There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept."
All of that written, that is not write that (portraiture as an example) there are lenses that might be better suited than other lenses for a given use. But even that idea is predicated upon the picture maker's picturing intent. As in, the intent to depict a subject as he/she really is or depict him/her in an idyllic representational manner.
In any event, if one is depending upon lens "magic" to make one's picture(s) "sweeter", iMo, one is relying on a "gimmick" rather than unique personal vision to float his/her boat.
*I use this example, not to denigrate the maker thereof, but rather as an excellent example of lens "magic" thinking.