How do you define "QUALITY" in a lens?
Is it Sharpness?
Is it Contrast?
Is it Specifications?
Is it Lens Test Results?
Is it some esoteric calculations that only a geek can figure
out?
It's been a while since we've had our MC/SC/blacknose/silvernose
wars and I'm in a mood to stir the pot, I guess.
When is a flawed lens NOT a flawed lens? Is haze on an element
necessarily a bad thing? Where does character come in?
Science and art sometimes mix. With good science, you attempt
to eliminate all possible variables that could affect the
outcome of a test. In a lens you may seek absolute sharpness,
color accuracy and flare control. Basically, you want exactly
what is there to be captured by the film in exactly the manner
that it exists in real life. Art is typically different,
though. Art is typically less concerned with scientific
accuracy as it is interested in affecting an emotion on the
viewer.
Which brings me to my point of discussion. When is a flaw in a
lens actually a benefit?
AG-Schnozz
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|