"It's all about the glass". Show me examples please

Hi,
People say it's all about the glass. Can you post some photos of an identical scene taken with 2 different lenses to show me examples of 'it's all about the glass', it produces lovely results etc?

For me I normally buy equiptment 2nd hand, same for lenses and normally get Tamron/Sigma over Pentax lenses as they tend to be cheaper.

---

Cheers,
Pa
http://www.photoblog.ie where every post have a musical reference as it's title.

This could be quite difficult to do when displayed at forum sizes. It will take more extreme differences to demonstrate any visible effect.

It might be possible to show different bokeh and resistance to flare though.

I'll have a look, but am not sure that I have much material shot in the way you ask.

---

Best regards, John

I don't have any examples to hand of identical scenes, but I can say that, like you, all of my stuff is second hand, very much done on the cheap.
However, I bought a Pentax 50mm f1.7 off a member here. It is a cracking lens. Even with my limited skills I could "feel" the difference, so I can understand how better glass makes a huge difference.

Which reminds me: I just don't use that lens enough!

---

Getting there! Thanks to you guys

Pentax K10d, *istDL, Kit lens ( 18-55mm ), 50mm f1.7 lens, Tamron 70-300mm lens, Prinzflex 70-162 manual lens, Various old flashes.

Same scene but not quiet same image

DA* 50-135mm at 50mm




Tamron 17-50mm at 16mm




I am sure I must have some from the same show at 50mm on both lenses..

---

PPG Wedding photography Flickr
Concert photography

Currently on a Pentax hiatus until an FF Pentax is released

I've had a good look and although there are some locations that I have used several times for different tests, there are no really identical shots that show anything meaningful. Any differences have been influenced by the camera body as much as the lens.

I do think that lenses need to become aquainted with before we start to see if they suit or not. Despite MTF testing, there is still another major facotr - the character of a lens. I've had so many lenses, and just as an example, these I have really liked:

Pentax 100mm f2.8M, Pentax 43mm f1.9FA, Pentax 18-135mmDA, Pentax 100mm Macro lenses in general. There are more really, but that's a few.

These I have not liked much:

Pentax 120mm f2.8M, 85mm f2M

There are plenty of other lenses that were just fine, like my Soligor 105mm pre-set lens, but the list could be too long...

---

Best regards, John

Hey Gary how'd you get that 17-50 to go to 16mm?
Kidding
Fabulous shots...

---

Cheers Jules...

My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.

www.exaggeratedperspectives.com

Found one here we go...

Tamron 17-50mm




DA* 50-135mm at 50mm

---

PPG Wedding photography Flickr
Concert photography

Currently on a Pentax hiatus until an FF Pentax is released

Its magic Jules

---

PPG Wedding photography Flickr
Concert photography

Currently on a Pentax hiatus until an FF Pentax is released

I think that is what I was trying to say about the old manual 50mm f1.7

It just seemed to react better to an environment I've tried various other lenses in. If I get chance tonight I'll dig some examples out. They are just snaps of my daughter in the riding school, though; nothing fancy.

---

Getting there! Thanks to you guys

Pentax K10d, *istDL, Kit lens ( 18-55mm ), 50mm f1.7 lens, Tamron 70-300mm lens, Prinzflex 70-162 manual lens, Various old flashes.

Try getting this with a Sigma or Tamron.



As reference, the background is a window & wall roughly 2 feet behind.
K-5 & A50 f/1.2 @ f/1.2 (so yeah, its about the glass )

---

My Gallery
[url=http://pentaxphotogallery.com/Robbie Corrigan]ppg[/url]

@robbiec nice photo but it doesn't help me.
I need two items/subjects/scenes shot with exact same settings and no PP applied.

---

Cheers,
Pa
http://www.photoblog.ie where every post have a musical reference as it's title.

It's all about the glass covers a multitude of debates. You're looking for an comparison between focal lengths, not all about the glass , just stressing the point a little.

---

My Gallery
[url=http://pentaxphotogallery.com/Robbie Corrigan]ppg[/url]

The way I see it when someone says it's all about the glass they often talk about sweet lens for warm
Portraits, great colours etc.

If I see two photos at same settings then
I can see any difference that the lens produces.

All of my lenses I'd consider fast (tamron 17-50 f2.8, Sigma70-200 f2.8, Pentax 100mm macro 2.8 and Sigma 30mm f2.

So when I hear spend your money on glass I thought it meant a Pentax 17-50 f2.8 and not a Tamron 17-50 f2.8.
But now I read it as buy good/fast lenses, not that lens X will give better image than lens Y at same settings.

The whole discussion started from when I told someone I was planning on upgrading from K-7 to K-5 and he said 'don't they say spend your money on glass'

---

Cheers,
Pa
http://www.photoblog.ie where every post have a musical reference as it's title.

Better glass will get you better pics but you need to know how the glass renders and if the FL is one you use a lot of. So the first thing we need to know is what you shoot and at what focal lengths - then the debate can commence.

You are not going to get enough comparisons of the type you are asking for to come to any definitive conclusions because people simply don't shoot an identical scene with two lenses !

Check Flikr or pBase for shots from lenses you are interested in - you can usually start to get a feel for the nature of each lens. However don't forget that the competency of the shooter matters too !

---

http://frogfish.smugmug.com/ Pentax. Pentax DA*300/4, Cosina 55/1.2, Lens Baby Composer Pro & Edge 80, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.
Nikon. D800. D600. Sigma 500/4.5, Nikon 300/2.8 VRII, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 35/2.0, Sigma 50/1.4, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikon TC20EIII, Nikon TC14EII, Kenko x1.4, Sigma 2.0

One of my my photographic aims has always been to get to know my lenses intimately (no comments please) to the extent that I know instantly which lens to use for which shots. For example, I have 3 lenses that cover the 300mm focal length and will usually opt for either the Pentax 55-300 or the Sigma 50-500 as they both have good IQ. However, where a shot screams out for specatacular bokeh I will use my Tamron Adapt-a-matic 300mm F5.6. Why? It is not as sharp or contrasty as the other lenses (not surprising as it's 40 years old), but it has 10 aperture blades and produces the most fantastic out of focus effects given the right conditions.

I'm not sure if there's any validity gained by comparing identical shots in identical conditions with different lenses. The point is that different lenses will shine in different conditions and the trick is to know what to use and when.

I hope this makes sense!

Regards
David

---

Flickr

Nicola's Apartments, Kassiopi, Corfu

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs