!!

Hello Guest! Kumusta!

Thank you for visiting PiPho Forum!
It would be best if you will register so you can use the additional benefits of the community such as joining events, interacting with fellow members and view the hidden boards of the forum.

 
 
Mabuhay, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Sorry, this shoutbox does not exist.

Recent Classifieds Posts

Recent Forum Posts

adidas campus by likesups
[Yesterday at 07:17:39 PM]


adidas adilette by Jesse Temple
[Yesterday at 11:08:48 AM]


adidas ultra boost by Jesse Temple
[Yesterday at 11:03:16 AM]


Please recommend canon camera semi pro by likesups
[October 19, 2019, 07:23:48 PM]


Landscapes & Seascapes For All by likesups
[October 16, 2019, 08:42:20 PM]


Happy when It Rains by likesups
[October 14, 2019, 03:24:39 PM]


Life in New York by likesups
[October 12, 2019, 07:22:57 PM]


VRFPhotography by xcaliber14
[October 07, 2019, 09:53:08 AM]


FS: Nikon D850 dslr 45.7MP Camera body by fotoplace
[September 24, 2019, 07:11:49 PM]


Letting go of all or none at all. by wilybarrozo
[September 22, 2019, 09:41:27 PM]



Author Topic: lens or body? an answer to a myth  (Read 10832 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dtmateojr

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Circulan
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2011
  • Posts: 283
  • Liked: 4
lens or body? an answer to a myth
« on: November 05, 2011, 07:25:15 AM »
Just my opinionated view of this question:

http://dtmateojr.wordpress.com/2011/11/04/the-myth-lens-first-before-camera-body/

Feel free to discuss.

Pinoy Photography - Philippines Online Photography Community

lens or body? an answer to a myth
« on: November 05, 2011, 07:25:15 AM »

Offline caterpillar

  • Trade Count: (20)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Feb 2007
  • Posts: 1269
  • Liked: 36
  • Gender: Male
    • none
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #1 on: November 05, 2011, 12:50:39 PM »
There really is no myth to dispel.

It is not a question of body vs lens. You need both to take pictures. Well, there might come a time that you won't need a lens. And there might come a time that the body can be separated in multiple parts, but we are talking of today's technology and even as far back as 100 years. You will need a lens and a body to shoot pictures. Well, unless you want to shoot with a pinhole, you do need both! :)


  And good lenses need not be heavy. The mistake is to think big and heavy means good optical quality. Primes can be small and sharp and optically even superior. So, it is a mistake to equate weight, and size with good optical quality. Now THAT is the myth that has to be dispelled.


  Besides, today's kit lens are amazingly sharp even for zooms. They will rival even some primes at certain focal lengths and will only be defeated in the areas of aperture and maybe corner sharpness, or some distortions at widest focal lengths especially very wide FLs. But optically, they are no longer slouches. But even in the era of film, the kit lens is a 50mm f1.8. So, good lenses need not be big, heavy, or overly compromised optically. The kit lenses basically do very well for general photography. It is only when one moves to more specific photography that we do need other lenses. Birders will want longer FL. Macro shooters would eventually want a true macro lens. Wedding/event shooters would want fast lenses. This is not a weakness of the kit lens. It is simply the reason why DSLRs and interchangeable lenses operate. Change the lens to suit your needs.

  But the telling argument that there is no myth at all, is this. Why would one buy a lens without a body? When you are starting out, you don't buy just body!   :P  How are you going to take pictures? And if you buy a body only, what are you going to do with a lens only without a body unless you already have pre-existing lenses?

  You buy both. Only those with existing lenses and are set would avoid buying a body-lens combo. But then again, there is always the lens and the body. Even with cameras with no interchangeable lenses, there is always a lens and a body.

  So, there really is nothing to dispel. Unless it is a hammer just wanting something to pound.
  
« Last Edit: November 05, 2011, 12:52:33 PM by caterpillar »
--- Caterpillar ---

Offline retina

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 6464
  • Liked: 1046
  • Gender: Male
  • Camera: Fujifilm
  • Field: Travel
  • Model: Nikon D750
  • Nickname: Doc A
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #2 on: November 05, 2011, 02:26:31 PM »
A never knew that there is such a myth until I read this one.

Offline tackypinili

  • There is no cow level!
  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 744
  • Liked: 13
  • Gender: Male
  • Sharp Shooter Sogeking
    • Flickr Photostream
  • Camera: Canon
  • Field: Portraiture
  • Nickname: Tacky
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #3 on: November 05, 2011, 02:31:26 PM »
There really is no myth to dispel.

It is not a question of body vs lens. You need both to take pictures. Well, there might come a time that you won't need a lens. And there might come a time that the body can be separated in multiple parts, but we are talking of today's technology and even as far back as 100 years. You will need a lens and a body to shoot pictures. Well, unless you want to shoot with a pinhole, you do need both! :)


  And good lenses need not be heavy. The mistake is to think big and heavy means good optical quality. Primes can be small and sharp and optically even superior. So, it is a mistake to equate weight, and size with good optical quality. Now THAT is the myth that has to be dispelled.


  Besides, today's kit lens are amazingly sharp even for zooms. They will rival even some primes at certain focal lengths and will only be defeated in the areas of aperture and maybe corner sharpness, or some distortions at widest focal lengths especially very wide FLs. But optically, they are no longer slouches. But even in the era of film, the kit lens is a 50mm f1.8. So, good lenses need not be big, heavy, or overly compromised optically. The kit lenses basically do very well for general photography. It is only when one moves to more specific photography that we do need other lenses. Birders will want longer FL. Macro shooters would eventually want a true macro lens. Wedding/event shooters would want fast lenses. This is not a weakness of the kit lens. It is simply the reason why DSLRs and interchangeable lenses operate. Change the lens to suit your needs.

  But the telling argument that there is no myth at all, is this. Why would one buy a lens without a body? When you are starting out, you don't buy just body!   :P  How are you going to take pictures? And if you buy a body only, what are you going to do with a lens only without a body unless you already have pre-existing lenses?

  You buy both. Only those with existing lenses and are set would avoid buying a body-lens combo. But then again, there is always the lens and the body. Even with cameras with no interchangeable lenses, there is always a lens and a body.

  So, there really is nothing to dispel. Unless it is a hammer just wanting something to pound.
  

Agree! Many may choose upgrading the lens line up than the body, while many would choose upgrading the body. Its the balance between the limitations that your setup is giving you. You lack zoom? upgrade the lens. You want faster fps? you upgrade the body and so on..why would you be bias on just a lens or the body if youll be needing both?
My Flickr Photostream --> http://www.flickr.com/photos/tackypinili
tackypinili.lens.ph

Offline caterpillar

  • Trade Count: (20)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Feb 2007
  • Posts: 1269
  • Liked: 36
  • Gender: Male
    • none
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #4 on: November 05, 2011, 08:04:58 PM »
Agree! Many may choose upgrading the lens line up than the body, while many would choose upgrading the body. Its the balance between the limitations that your setup is giving you. You lack zoom? upgrade the lens. You want faster fps? you upgrade the body and so on..why would you be bias on just a lens or the body if youll be needing both?


  I hope the OP does not think I am trying to pick a fight or being argumentative. But your point is the same as my position. There really isn't any argument or even a myth.

 As far as body upgrades goes, and I am speaking of DSLRs here or interchangeable lenses, typically, the best time to upgrade is on a 2 generation or revision cycle. For example, if you bought a 20d, then going for the 30d may not bring enough new features or improvements to matter the update. It would take a 40d or the 3rd cycle of a 50d for the difference from the 20d to be truly significant.

   There are exceptions of course. The 10d to 20d upgrade for example is really significant, but for the same class, normally it is best to skip a cycle or two to get the best technological improvements.

  The other exception is if the upgrade is from a certain class to another class of dslr. For example, going from a 600d to a 50d or a 60d to a 1d mk3 for example are upgrades not in terms of generations but of segments/classes. Thus even if a 60d is the latest, moving even to a 1d mk3 w/c is older may still be an upgrade simply because the 1D series is of a different and higher class.

  As for lenses, most of the time, I don't see getting  lens as upgrades. Here's why. If you have a 70-200 f4L IS, are you upgrading if you start eyeing a 70-200 f2.8L IS? Is it a downgrade to go the other way around?

  To me lenses are specific tool to solve a specific job. An ef 100 f2.8 usm macro may be more expensive than an ef 100 f2.0 usm, but it is not an upgrade. The macro will be too slow for portraiture work both in aperture and AF speed. OTOH, the 100 f2.0 usm will be no match for true macro work. Again, 2 different lenses, two different tools, to solve different shooting situations. One lens is not an upgrade of the other. It's just a different tool.

  Even getting a 17-50 f2.8 from an 18-55 f3.5-5.6 for me is not really an upgrade. You can call it that, but optically there is nothing wrong with the kit lens. You just get the 17-50/55 f2.8 for the f2.8 w/c is for low light. Optically, for the same aperture, the kit lens is really very close to the f2.8 counterpart. What it lacks is the f2.8 w/c is why one is getting the faster lens.

  I used to have a 55-250 IS. I may get one again because I miss it. I also have a 70-200 f2.8L IS. Both are basically optically on par with each other. What sets them apart is the aperture speed, focal length range, weight and size. It's hard for me to consider taking the 70-200 f2.8L IS for trips. It's too heavy and big. The 55-250 IS is perfect for that.  OTOH, I cannot really use the 55-250 IS when I am shooting events.
It is too slow both in AF speed and lens speed. So, having the 70-200 f2.8L IS is not an upgrade. It is just that it works well for certain situations. Same with the 55-250 IS.

  Lenses are like the drill bits in your electric drill. The electric drill is your dslr. The bit is the lens. I have a P75 1/4" bit and a P450 3/4" bit that is good for masonry. Putting the 3/4" in the drill is not an upgrade. It just so happens it's the right bit to use to make a big hole in the masonry. I would not use that same 3/4" if I needed only 1/4" so I can hang a picture on a wall. This is why I don't see lens buying as upgrades most of the time. Each lens is there for their special qualities that is useful for certain types of shoots. Sometimes, the features and capabilities overlap. But I don't think  you'll think that the  17-40 f4L is a downgrade from the ef-s 17-55  f2.8 IS. Mind you, the ef-s is faster, has IS and is MORE EXPENSIVE than the L lens!

  For me, lenses usually are not upgrades. They are just the drill bits necessary to do the job.
--- Caterpillar ---

Offline rasta

  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Ovalteenees
  • ***
  • Join Date: Oct 2008
  • Posts: 65
  • Liked: 0
  • Gender: Male
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #5 on: November 05, 2011, 09:02:43 PM »
So, good lenses need not be big, heavy, or overly compromised optically.

Medyo nalilito ako sa statement na ito  ???

Maybe i'm misreading something? Dun ako confused sa "good lenses need not be ... overly compromised optically."
How can a lens be "good" if it is compromised optically?

Offline dtmateojr

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Circulan
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2011
  • Posts: 283
  • Liked: 4
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #6 on: November 05, 2011, 09:18:57 PM »
Everyone has the right to voice out his opinion. As the saying goes, "if everyone thinks exactly the same then no one is thinking."

I can see valid points above. However...

The main point of the post is that photography is supposed to be fun. To sacrifice fun for a premium lens is absurd. Unfortunately, most photographers think that lens is everything. No. Fun is everything. Glass is king mentality fails miserably to explain Hipstamatic, the rise of the Olympus pen or Lomography. Glass does not explain fun.

Yes, not all good lenses are heavy. The nifty-fifty is very light. But to trade that with a 24-70/2.8 is foolish. There simply is no comparison. If you want good glass, prepare to carry them. Now that isn't fun. I wish I could carry a 70-200/2.8 for an entire photoshoot.

Offline pitbull

  • Impeous Man
  • Trade Count: (42)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Posts: 7354
  • Liked: 1124
  • Gender: Male
  • Patron ng mga Kolehiyala
    • Ang blog ng mga pogi
  • Camera: X20
  • Field: Landscape
  • Nickname: Ninong
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #7 on: November 05, 2011, 09:30:15 PM »
neglecting the camera body before was somewhat justifiable since it is the film and the lens that have the biggest effect on the image produced. now in digital, you need to have an equally capable body, since the sensor at the present replaced film on digital bodies.  :o :o :o

personally, it is equally important. buy what you can afford and upgrade later when you need it. buying the best may not be the best idea if you still do not know what you want to shoot or do with it. an informed decision when purchasing gears will save you a lot of money down the road in this hobby, and less time hanging around in the FS section.  ::)

Offline retina

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 6464
  • Liked: 1046
  • Gender: Male
  • Camera: Fujifilm
  • Field: Travel
  • Model: Nikon D750
  • Nickname: Doc A
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #8 on: November 06, 2011, 12:39:45 AM »


Yes, not all good lenses are heavy. The nifty-fifty is very light. But to trade that with a 24-70/2.8 is foolish. There simply is no comparison. If you want good glass, prepare to carry them. Now that isn't fun. I wish I could carry a 70-200/2.8 for an entire photoshoot.
Why it is foolish? I have a lot of fun with 24-70.I don't find it heavy because I can leave behind the 24,28,35 and 50. Changing lenses is no fun and I rather carry an all around zoom.

"Most photographers think that lens is everything"...How can you presume and assume this? Did you have a data to say so? It does not sounds opinionated already...it looks like a fact !!!Well, sorry I hope I have not misread the post but I am still entitled of my opinion.

Offline pitbull

  • Impeous Man
  • Trade Count: (42)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Posts: 7354
  • Liked: 1124
  • Gender: Male
  • Patron ng mga Kolehiyala
    • Ang blog ng mga pogi
  • Camera: X20
  • Field: Landscape
  • Nickname: Ninong
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #9 on: November 06, 2011, 12:47:17 AM »
i do not like the 24-70,it is foolish :o :o :o because i cannot afford it yet ::) maybe soon pag nabayaran na ako  ::)

Offline retina

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 6464
  • Liked: 1046
  • Gender: Male
  • Camera: Fujifilm
  • Field: Travel
  • Model: Nikon D750
  • Nickname: Doc A
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #10 on: November 06, 2011, 12:54:19 AM »
i do not like the 24-70,it is foolish :o :o :o because i cannot afford it yet ::) maybe soon pag nabayaran na ako  ::)
Ang galing mo talaga magpatawa , idol Rico!!Di ba masgusto mo naman yong 20mm mo? Di ba mabigat yong 70-200VR2 mo? You are not having fun with it, if we go on that line of thinking.Mas magaan naman ang 70-300VR mo na nasa FS na. ;) ;D ;D

Offline pitbull

  • Impeous Man
  • Trade Count: (42)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Posts: 7354
  • Liked: 1124
  • Gender: Male
  • Patron ng mga Kolehiyala
    • Ang blog ng mga pogi
  • Camera: X20
  • Field: Landscape
  • Nickname: Ninong
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #11 on: November 06, 2011, 01:06:02 AM »
different setups for different trips, thats all.

16-35mm/70-200VRII if feeling safe.

20mm/105mm AFD if i dont want to get noticed.

going back to the topic, the reasoning behind that for some people is that when you buy the best lens that you want,know or can afford, it stays with you. unlike the body, where you upgrade it from time to time. there is some truth to this, but this will not be true for every person and every situation.

this is one of those egg and chicken, indian or pana arguement. :o :o :o

Offline wally

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Tocino + Rice
  • ****
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Posts: 207
  • Liked: 7
  • Gender: Male
    • SiWallyNi
  • Field: Portraiture
  • Nickname: Wally
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #12 on: November 06, 2011, 01:25:40 AM »
mahirap na usapan talaga to. para sakin, basta alam mo kung ano hanap at gusto mo, bilhin mo, kung may pera ka.
marami naman kse na yong "hilig" ay "luho" na rin. kaya, kapag may bago labas, bibili. parang cellphone.
di naman kse talaga dapat ilimit ang sarili sa lens or body lang para sa upgrade.
meron pa nga downgrade ang ginagawa kse mabigat at malaki ang current gears nila, nakakapagod dalhin.
it doesn't really matter. kung magaling ang indian, tatama ang pana. hehehe
 ;D

Offline dtmateojr

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Circulan
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2011
  • Posts: 283
  • Liked: 4
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #13 on: November 06, 2011, 06:58:13 AM »
Fact: 9/10 photographers prefer lens upgrade over camera upgrade.
Proof: it was in this forum that somebody with a Canon 1000D wanted to upgrade to a 7D yet most insisted he goes for the 24-70/2.8.

Fact: more likely than not, these same people who go for the "glass is king" principle are also mocking Olympus for having a small sensor knowing fully well that Olympus has lenses that may be superior to the Canikon equivalents. Hypocrites? You be the judge.

Again, glass is overrated. Sharpness is overrated. Glass fails to explain the Lomography movement.

Fun explains everything and that is the main point of the post.

Offline dtmateojr

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Circulan
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2011
  • Posts: 283
  • Liked: 4
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #14 on: November 06, 2011, 07:05:22 AM »
Why it is foolish? I have a lot of fun with 24-70.I don't find it heavy because I can leave behind the 24,28,35 and 50. Changing lenses is no fun and I rather carry an all around zoom.




"Most photographers think that lens is everything"...How can you presume and assume this? Did you have a data to say so? It does not sounds opinionated already...it looks like a fact !!!Well, sorry I hope I have not misread the post but I am still entitled of my opinion.

You misread my post. The 50mm is light yet a very good lens. An exception to the fact that majority of good lenses are heavy. Well good lenses are generally heavier compared to the cheap alternatives. But, would you replace a 24-70/2.8 with a 50mm? I dont think so. So be ready to carry a heavy lens. I dont know where you got your response.

Read the entire forum? For an example, read my previous post.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2011, 07:07:02 AM by dtmateojr »

Offline dtmateojr

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Circulan
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2011
  • Posts: 283
  • Liked: 4
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #15 on: November 06, 2011, 07:12:14 AM »
To make my argument complete, this is another post I made that should nail the coffin:

http://dtmateojr.wordpress.com/2011/11/04/brand-x-has-a-wider-lens-selection-*toink*/

Offline retina

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 6464
  • Liked: 1046
  • Gender: Male
  • Camera: Fujifilm
  • Field: Travel
  • Model: Nikon D750
  • Nickname: Doc A
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #16 on: November 06, 2011, 07:36:34 AM »


Yes, not all good lenses are heavy. The nifty-fifty is very light. But to trade that with a 24-70/2.8 is foolish. There simply is no comparison. If you want good glass, prepare to carry them. Now that isn't fun. I wish I could carry a 70-200/2.8 for an entire photoshoot.
Di ko kasi maintindyihan ang foolishness nito or what you mean with this..sorry kung you mean something else. Pero hanggang dyan lang ang kaya ng isip ko.Kasi not all have same needs and I am willing to trade my 50mm for a 24-70 any time any place.Pero the real truth is the 50mm 1.8 is so cheap,small and light..just buy one put it in your bag and carry it along with your 24-70.

Birds photographers carry heavy cam,heavy tripod, heavy lenses but they have a lots of fun. A lot of us have 50mm 1.8 but most of the time prefer 24-70 during events and have loads of fun.

I have read back your post and I don't think that there is such a myth!!!Different style different strokes, different purpose different gear,etc,etc. etc.

Warning to the audience: This is just a discussion and we are not having a fight. Opinions,opinions lang ha,please...
« Last Edit: November 06, 2011, 07:42:15 AM by retina »

Offline retina

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 6464
  • Liked: 1046
  • Gender: Male
  • Camera: Fujifilm
  • Field: Travel
  • Model: Nikon D750
  • Nickname: Doc A
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #17 on: November 06, 2011, 07:39:23 AM »
To make my argument complete, this is another post I made that should nail the coffin:

http://dtmateojr.wordpress.com/2011/11/04/brand-x-has-a-wider-lens-selection-*toink*/


Link is dead when I clicked it!!

....it worked, just removed the toink
« Last Edit: November 06, 2011, 07:54:03 AM by retina »

Offline dtmateojr

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Circulan
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2011
  • Posts: 283
  • Liked: 4
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #18 on: November 06, 2011, 07:49:14 AM »
Link is dead when I clicked it!!


It was dingbated by the forum rules :)

Try this instead:

http://tinyurl.com/3tls7jk

Offline knifebox

  • Buraot sa Buhay
  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Robot
  • ******
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 1141
  • Liked: 153
  • Gender: Male
  • Idem Sum Qui Semper Fi
    • Images by James Enriquez
  • Camera: Lumix LX5, Canon S95
  • Field: Landscape
  • Model: Dory
  • Nickname: JC
Re: lens or body? an answer to a myth
« Reply #19 on: November 06, 2011, 07:56:30 AM »
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions but generalizing that heavy lenses won't let you have fun while shooting is IMO total hogwash.

I don't think a few sore limbs would take away the fun factor of shooting festivals or events. It's all in a persons mindset.

The "myth" your trying to dispel is no more than a comparison of value between a lens and a body. Although you do need both to take pictures nowadays (if you're into full sized interchangeable's) people commenting in that particular thread take into consideration the rate of depreciation between the body and lens mentioned so the person can have have the best bang for the buck.

As far as kung mag enjoy sya or hindi,  i don't think covered na yun nung discussion.

Another example of heavy gear but still having fun is shooting landscape photography. Tripod, body, UWA (na hindi naman talaga magaang), There is that possibility of gears getting soaked or dipped in salt/ freshwater or worse the myriad of accidents waiting to happen while trekking dangerous areas just to get a few shots.

Why keep doing it if it's not fun?
Creating Value From Experience  Digital Light Photography Lifestyle
Lens.ph

Tags:
 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4146 Replies
767258 Views
Last post January 05, 2010, 09:30:06 AM
by tekgik
2638 Replies
376473 Views
Last post April 08, 2019, 05:04:37 PM
by ken2
26 Replies
3538 Views
Last post July 03, 2010, 02:58:15 AM
by ArtS
29 Replies
5915 Views
Last post August 18, 2011, 07:20:23 PM
by AFTRMTH


Get this spot now imagesmith photography Two Stops Over