Optical overkill?


George Lazarette

Link Posted 08/07/2013 - 15:26
rparmar wrote:
Yes.

If we are, as we should be, talking about Pentax equipment, then the answer, of course, is NO, (assuming we are talking about current or recent cameras, all of which have more than sufficient subtlety and resolution to do justice to the best lenses available).

You could try to argue that the early 6MP bodies couldn't do justice to the finest lenses, but even there a good lens made an observable difference to the quality of an image.

But really, seeing that it is the sensor that makes the image, the question should really be the other way around.
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.

Frogherder

Link Posted 08/07/2013 - 15:57
Quote:
why manufacturers supply 'mediocre/average/good' lenses with their cameras when they could supply better.

That's easy - it's all down to cost (actual manufacturing or perceived retail).

Just think back to your original purchase, if the retail price was dramatically higher than the competition it would have been hard to justify it on the grounds of a 'good'/'better' lens.

Secondly once you're committed to a brand it'll be your next purchase (as it were) to get a better lens, now that you can evaluate what you're missing

regards
Bernard

rparmar

Link Posted 08/07/2013 - 18:30
George Lazarette wrote:
rparmar wrote:
Yes.

If we are, as we should be, talking about Pentax equipment, then the answer, of course, is NO, (assuming we are talking about current or recent cameras, all of which have more than sufficient subtlety and resolution to do justice to the best lenses available).

The original question was: "is it possible for the performance of a high quality lens to be scuppered by the camera attached?" This seems to be a general question and the answer to that is "yes". Even if restricted to Pentax gear, once must consider everything from tiny sensors to 645D equipment.

The answer in a more general case is difficult to determine, even if one is an expert on modulation transform functions, Airy disks and the Rayleigh criterion.

Two of the best sources of information are this Canon forum thread and the Luminous Landscape article.
Listen to my albums free on BandCamp. Or visit my main website for links to photography, etc.

George Lazarette

Link Posted 08/07/2013 - 23:33
The original question, Robin, was from a user of Pentax K-mount cameras.

Even if we widen the scope to "tiny sensor" cameras, how many have interchangeable lenses? Not many, so your point is irrelevant.

You no doubt post on many different forums, covering a variety of brands, in order to promote your various websites. Your confusion is therefore perhaps understandable. However, often the name of the forum will provide a clue as to the brand concerned. In this case the name "Pentax" is fairly prominent in a number of places. Look carefully and you will see it.

By the way, linking to other brands' websites is not encouraged here. I wouldn't want you to get into trouble.

G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.

davidtrout

Link Posted 09/07/2013 - 00:06
My K30 works happily with any of my lenses so does my Mk1 K5. In fact they are all far better at photography than I'll ever be.
David

PPG: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/davidtrout
PPG: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/davidtrout

rparmar

Link Posted 09/07/2013 - 00:20
George Lazarette wrote:
You no doubt post on many different forums, covering a variety of brands, in order to promote your various websites.

Well, George, your personal antipathy towards me is derailing yet another thread. As always I will bow out after a single response, since I do not believe such childish behaviour should be rewarded.

Of course if you actually read my websites, you would see that I don't sell ads and don't engage in sponsorship schemes of any kind. Unlike this site and many others. So your accusation is unfounded. And contradictory.

I only post messages on public sites relevant to my interests. And only respond when I have something of value to offer. The contrast between us couldn't be greater, could it?

No doubt my interests are significantly broader than your own constrained world view. So you might be surprised to see me contribute to discussions of aesthetics, philosophy, film, literature, photography, programming, radio, sound art, composition, and so on. To view all this as merely self-promotion really does betray your limited outlook.

George Lazarette wrote:
Your confusion is therefore perhaps understandable. However, often the name of the forum will provide a clue as to the brand concerned. In this case the name "Pentax" is fairly prominent in a number of places. Look carefully and you will see it.

The sort of passive-aggressive behaviour you demonstrate here says a lot more about your own motivations than it does about mine. If you would engage in any sort of self-reflexive behaviour you might consider the wisdom in such playground taunts. (I really think some Aristotle would do you the world of good.)

George Lazarette wrote:
By the way, linking to other brands' websites is not encouraged here. I wouldn't want you to get into trouble.

I imagine the site administrators know how to do their job. Your lack of faith in them is typical. After all, only you know best, right George?

Your fear of knowledge is not shared by everyone here. If I link to information it's only because there are sources worth sharing. The very basis of the internet is communication, and the fundamental mechanism of the web is the link. Strange of you to have overlooked these obvious facts for so long.
Listen to my albums free on BandCamp. Or visit my main website for links to photography, etc.
Last Edited by rparmar on 09/07/2013 - 00:21

Pentaxophile

Link Posted 09/07/2013 - 00:24
Robin

Ignore him.
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]

johnriley

Link Posted 09/07/2013 - 01:06
I think we've had enough of the personalities now. So no more please, anything further will be removed.

Back to topic please.
Best regards, John
Last Edited by johnriley on 09/07/2013 - 01:07

George Lazarette

Link Posted 09/07/2013 - 01:14
To be honest, there's not much more to say on this topic.

The simple fact is that all Pentax sensors are excellent, and capable of getting the best out of the most exalted lenses.

Much better to have a less expensive body and a great lens than vice-versa.

G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.

gwing

Link Posted 09/07/2013 - 07:07
George Lazarette wrote:
To be honest, there's not much more to say on this topic.

There's nobody forcing anyone who's got bored with this to keep reading the thread but that doesn't stop the rest of us carrying on if we are interested.

Quote:


The simple fact is that all Pentax sensors are excellent, and capable of getting the best out of the most exalted lenses.

Well it would be nice to have things simple. But this subject isn't simple, and the above isn't a fact either.

Put more reasonably, it takes a good lens, operating at wide apertures, to exceed the resolution available from current sensors. And even then it may not manage it for all light colours (yes there is a very big difference between blue and red light characteristics - it is not simple).

Quote:


Much better to have a less expensive body and a great lens than vice-versa.

G

That I can agree with, but again as a matter of opinion, for my use cases and not necessarily everyone's.
Last Edited by gwing on 09/07/2013 - 07:12

Dogsbody

Link Posted 09/07/2013 - 12:53
George Lazarette wrote:
To be honest, there's not much more to say on this topic.

The simple fact is that all Pentax sensors are excellent, and capable of getting the best out of the most exalted lenses.

Much better to have a less expensive body and a great lens than vice-versa.

G

Oh yes there is.... as a nice point to close the thread (if so desired) I have bought two prime lenses from a reputable dealer in Watford but there is a separate thread on that.
A very happily using a K30. My wife says I have too many lenses.
Last Edited by Dogsbody on 09/07/2013 - 13:08
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.