Magical qualities....

jra wrote in post #13912621
Having been on these forums for quite a while now, I've so often seen lenses as being described as having some type of "magical and unquantifiable" quality ascribed to them. It's gotten to the point that it makes me almost cringe when I see a review that mentions the "magical" qualities of a certain lens. So, this brings up the question......do you believe that any particular lens can hold a certain "magical and unable to explain" quality?

it's been said the 50mm 1.8 has a certain unquantifiable and indescribable "magical" quality

watt100 wrote in post #13914362
it's been said the 50mm 1.8 has a certain unquantifiable and indescribable "magical" quality

For the price and quality, this statement might be true.

Best,
MC

No. Some lenses are very good at what they are designed to do as result of specific and quantifiable features...but there is no "magic" about it.

I wouldn't say that a lens is magical, but rather it has unique "character" compared to other lenses in the same focal length/aperture range. 50L comes to mind: it's not "better" than it's slower brethren, it just renders differently when shot wide open thanks to the soft LOCA glow.

The isolation capabilities of a wide aperture prime doesn't make it any more magical compared to a f/4 zoom, nor does a f/2.8 zoom shot at 200mm doesn't make it anymore magical than an 18-55 shot @ 55mm & f/5.6. It's just physics.

MNUplander wrote in post #13914459
No. Some lenses are very good at what they are designed to do as result of specific and quantifiable features...but there is no "magic" about it.

I don't know about that. The first time I shot with my 85L this immediately popped into my head: http://www.youtube.com …5tSktm7zw&featu​re=related

Every aspect of a lens isn't measurable or even quantifiable (or is hard to extrapolate info from a graph to find the point that pertains to said character). There are many aspects that are a bit nuanced and people like in their lens of choice.

One of these characters (but definitely isn't nuanced) is definitely spherical aberration. You even see it in some of the best lenses (like the Leica-R 85/1.4 and the C/Y era Zeiss 85/1.4 and its modern twin). To pixel peepers its seen as a horrific aberration that effects sharpness but to portrait photographers (especially of women) it allows for a very flattering 'glow' and blur transition that no highly corrected lens could ever achieve. And just like lens vignetting its impossible to get this look in post, you can only approximate or imitate but nothing beats the look of the effect at the point of capture.

There's also the 3D look (not actual 3D for those who are too literal) and some lenses even impart an interesting volumetric feel to photos that really good for mid distance photojournalistic shooting.

With that said, I think calling it 'magic' allows people to discount all of this. I'd consider these 'magical' effects as aberrations that are not understood or widely known about.

How blasé we have all become...
We point a few pieces piece of moving, round, shiny glass held in place by variously by pieces of plastic or brass mounted on an aluminium alloy box, press a button and capture an image that is more detailed than we can see.

If this isn't magical, then honestly, what is? ...

I'll be happy to call any lens magical that can get a shot with the lens cap on.

I think any lens would be a lot more magical if it showed up in my camera bag without having to pay for it...

Maybe it's fungus?

wuzzittoya wrote in post #13915439
I think any lens would be a lot more magical if it showed up in my camera bag without having to pay for it...

That would definitely equate to magic in my book.

riffster wrote in post #13914274
Well I'm hoping to find magic in some old, cheap Russian lenses. I think I'll call them 'character' lenses.

They were making them in Russia and Ukraine.
Good luck to find it, I'm still keeping my parents Soviet made Leica copy camera from 1953.

I found that the lens I used for these was pretty magical, considering there was no aperture control, or even any glass!

...a 1D3 pinhole, huh?

100L. I Absolutely am blown away by this lens. Even more so then my 70-200mm 2.8 IS II

It's so magical, without even being in the same room as my Girlfirend, It made money disappear from my girls pocket the instant she bought it. Hows that for magic?