A DPR reader posted a request for folks to post names of, and images made with, the “magical” lenses that they own. I thought through my lens collection, and didn’t come up with any that seemed to fit that description. That got me thinking.
There are short lenses and long lenses. There are fast lenses and slow lenses. There are lenses with lots of aberrations, and there are lenses with few material aberrations. There are lenses with smooth bokeh, and lenses with busy — even doughnut-shaped — bokeh. There are sharp lenses and fuzzy ones; there are even some that manage to be both at the same time. And most all of those things can be mixed and matched.
And here’s the deal: you can many great images with any of them.
There are two ways of looking at this.
The first is that lenses are tools, and it’s up to the photographer who honors craft to understand the capabilities of the tools in his kit. When faced with a task, pull out the right lens and do the job.
The second is that photography is a process, and the tools influence the photographer’s vision through intense and prolonged interaction. So pick a lens, any lens, and use it until you find out the kind of images for which it is best suited.
Of course, in the real world, these things aren’t so cut and dried. But you can envision a photographic process leading to successful images as a combination of those approaches in ever-changing proportion. In that case, where is the magic? The magic is what the photographer brings to the party, in the artful selection of photographic techniques that work with a well-chosen tool. There’s no magic in the lens.
If you believe that the lens is where the magic is, you are doomed to an endless search for something outside yourself that will make your photography better. It’s not out there. It’s in you.
>use it until you find out the kind of images for which it is best suited.
That’s really where the magic comes in.
When a lens’s style and the photographer’s style match up well enough and allow the user to effortlessly produce the look they want.
I have a lens I consider to be “magical” but what I find is most magical about it is that it’s inspiring for me. I go out to shoot because I enjoy its results so much, and it works for my style(s).
Touché!!
I’ve often said that one can make good images with a pinhole camera, a cell phone, a Holga, a DSLR and a technical camera; one shouldn’t expect to make THE SAME images with each…
Needs saying again-the newest bestest etc is always a lure-
And there’s nothing wrong with buying and using good gear and new gear. There is something wrong with thinking that the gear has the ability to infuse “magic” into your images, or that the gear will transform your images by itself. And there’s really something wrong with concentrating on the search for a “magic feather” to the exclusion of looking inward and working hard and persistently.
Hi,
I have a lot of lenses and I love many of them. All my lenses can deliver great images. Sometimes I go the effort to shoot with a bunch of different lenses. A few months ago I wanted to make the best image I could from an autumn subject. So, i was shooting it with my:
– Sonnar 180/ 4 on the P45+. Sharp but to tight crop
– Contax Sonnar 35-135/3.3-4.5 at around 120 mm, good crop but no great corners
– Canon 24-105/4L at 105 mm, to short lens and bad corners
A few days later I nailed it, Shooting my 25 year old 80-200/2.G Minolta APO at 120 mm. 120 mm was a perfect match for the subject, the branches in the corners were as good as with the 180/4 and P45+ combo and light was about perfect.
The end of that story is that neither image made it to the wall. There is an older version of that image shot with my 10 MP Sony Alpha 100 back in 2007. The new images are probably better, but the old image is really good enough. So, the old image is still the one the wall…
Best regards
Erik
I came to this blog for your lens reviews on GFX, but this is the most worthwhile post.
Thanks for posting this.