Would I Notice the Difference?

morph1909

morph1909

Messages
67
Edit My Images
Yes
So I have a question about lenses. I have a nice camera that I get on really well with (Sony A99). Sure while i look at other cameras and think " that would be nice" im quite content with what I have. Often when you read through forums people asking should I upgrade my camera get told to "get better glass" Now to be honest I haven't spent a fortune on my glass and most of it about half of it ive picked up second hand from reputable supplier so I still get a warranty. I've got some primes 20, 50, 85 and 90mm Macro and 28-70 Zoom. Brought new most of them would come in at around £350 top.

So if we take the Sony 50mm F1.4 for example the lens i sue the most) cost of £299 new an upgrade would possibly be the Sigma 50 F1.4 Art ( around £570) or the Sony 50mm F1.5 ZA (£999) . Now i do print my images mainly A4 some A3.

So the question is would I really notice the difference between my £300 lens versus one that costs twice or even three times the amount? Would I wonder why I didn't make the decision years ago?
 
The ART will be a much better (bigger, heavier) lens. The Sony ZA 1.4 isn't worth the money vs the ART.
 
When buying any kit, you should ask yourself what your current kit is not allowing you to do. If you are happy with the prints you get from your current lens, there is no point in getting a "better" lens as it would not be "better" for you. Image quality depends a great deal on what you shoot. Some subjects show defects in the image more than others.

If sharpness is not an issue in your images, then a sharper lens will make no difference. If noise is an issue in your images, then a sharper lens might make the noise more visible. It really is down to your images, not the kit.
 
john.margetts said:
When buying any kit, you should ask yourself what your current kit is not allowing you to do. If you are happy with the prints you get from your current lens, there is no point in getting a "better" lens as it would not be "better" for you. Image quality depends a great deal on what you shoot. Some subjects show defects in the image more than others.

If sharpness is not an issue in your images, then a sharper lens will make no difference. If noise is an issue in your images, then a sharper lens might make the noise more visible. It really is down to your images, not the kit.
Click to expand...

Thats an interesting point - I was doing some product shots at the weekend . I used 3 different lenses there was some lettering on the product and I have noticed that some of lettering was just a bit sharper on the some of them. Also the colour rendition was slightly different. Settings where the same etc so i am pretty sure that in part that may have been down to the lens. In the main I shoot landscapes, table top and macro.
 
I've also got the Sony 50 f/1.4 - which I picked up 'new' for ~£110, when PC World decided to discontinue them a few years back and sold of their stock at bargain prices.

Personally I don't use it much - I find I use my Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 for that working range as it's more convenient.

As @twist said, the Sigma and CZ are both 'better' (and the Sigma is the pick of the two, given the relative costs), but if you're generally happy with the Sony you're probably better looking at getting something that increases your options instead say a 70-200 f/2.8 (if a longer lens is of interest), or saving the cash towards an A99II.
 
Try to find comparison tests online.

You cant just assume the more price the better for you or the more you will like it.

You might see sevral 50mm lenses tested against each going from a cheap £100 model all the way to a £1000+ model.

Incredibly sometimes the cheaper lenses can have near identical images and even faster focusing.

There can be a big improvement in some cases. I went from a cheap 55-200 IS to a expensive 70-200 IS and it is obvious.
 
I print my best images at A3+. Some of them have been shot with my best camera (Sony A77, 24MP), but most of them have been shot with my earlier Sony A350 & A550 (both 14MP). Some of them have been shot with my best lenses, a prime or a short range wide aperture zoom. But most of them have been shot with a very wide range general purpose zoom, a Sony 18-250mm, since that's what I use when I take my camera out with me just in case an interesting photographic opportunity turns up.

There are some clues like shallow DoF, bokeh, and focal length, which give good clues as to what kind of lens was used. A very careful close examination of fine detail such as barely legible lettering will show up the superiority of 24MP over 14MP, and a good sharp lens over a soft one, but generally speaking I've been surprised by how little difference in image quality there is -- on an A3+ print -- between my best quality gear and my everyday carry just-in-case gear. A critical fellow photographer will sometimes notice differences, but to the general public, including those who often visit photographic exhibitions, the differences are negligible.
 
The 50mm Art is one of the sharpest 50mm’s on the market, it’s crazy sharp. However, does that mean better? To some yes, but to others they prefer the overall rendering, the colours, the bokeh etc. For example the Nikon 58mm f1.4 is a pretty soft lens in comparison but it produces stunning images.

So the answer is it depends. Best thing is to try one out for yourself at a store and take yours along to compare.

What is it you’re not happy with with your current lens?
 
What @snerkler said.

What makes a lens ‘better’ is personal taste, sharper can be measured, but who needs maximum sharpness?

I shoot lots of ‘ordinary’ people, and if you think ladies over 30 want sharp pictures of themselves, you have no business pointing a camera at people.
 
snerkler said:
The 50mm Art is one of the sharpest 50mm’s on the market, it’s crazy sharp. However, does that mean better? To some yes, but to others they prefer the overall rendering, the colours, the bokeh etc. For example the Nikon 58mm f1.4 is a pretty soft lens in comparison but it produces stunning images.

So the answer is it depends. Best thing is to try one out for yourself at a store and take yours along to compare.

What is it you’re not happy with with your current lens?
Click to expand...

I am actually perfectly happy with the 50mm lens i was only using the pricing as an example. In fact that would probably in a lot of ways be the last one I upgraded. Is has advantages to me certainly over both the Sigma and the ZA in terms of both size and weight. Out of the lenses I have the one I am slightly disappointed with the 20mm it is slow to focus and never quite looks crisp when I use it. Could be I just got a bad copy. Could be I just need to use it a lot more and get to know its good points.

I have enjoyed reading the replies and it has been very helpful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top