• 02-03-2004, 10:19 AM
    Lenses and digital cameras
    Unfortunately the old rule "buy best glass and cheap body if you are on a budget" is not really true for digital.

    Why? With film you could use a good film in that cheap body. With digital the camera incorporates your film (digital sensor and imaging processing). Still most digital SLRs are now good enough to show that lenses are poor.

    That means lenses won't be cheap, but it also does not mean you need to buy the top glass. If you are on a tight budget stay with some excellent prime lenses.

    Caution: changing lenses introduces dust

  • 02-07-2004, 02:05 PM
    Roger Rowlett
    It's not all bad news...
    ...if you are using APS-sized sensors and 35 mm format lenses. In this case the digital sensor is heart-cutting the center portion of the image circle, where it is least affected by optical aberration, light falloff, and distortion. Bottom line: good to very good "consumer" lenses may have excellent image quality when mated to a digital SLR body.

  • 02-08-2004, 03:27 PM
    another view
    I agree with this from my experience. I've got two prints here that are 16x24's, both shot with a Fuji S2 and a Tokina 80-400 (roughly $400) zoom. They look great. I've also done a 24x36 with a Nikon 28-105 with great results too.

    Both of these lenses are consumer type variable aperture zooms. Not the cheapest of their type but nowhere near the pro-grade price. I'll have to do a large print with one of my sharpest lenses to see how that looks, but I'd be surprised if it was much better.
  • 03-19-2004, 07:18 PM
    Although I have used a lot of lenses, I still find that my best work tends to be from wide angle to the regular focal lengths. I tend to get up close and personal, even with animals. :) Telephoto tends to flatten scenes. I prefer depth of field and sharpness throughout the picture.

    It all depends on your photographic style.