Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 11 Apr 2014 (Friday) 02:38
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM (Art) is finally here!

 
WhyFi
Goldmember
Avatar
2,766 posts
Gallery: 237 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 804
Joined Apr 2008
Location: I got a castle in Brooklyn, that's where I dwell.
     
Apr 20, 2014 20:42 |  #196

Charlie wrote in post #16848300 (external link)
Depends.

No, it doesn't.


Bill is my name - I'm the most wanted man on my island, except I'm not on my island, of course. More's the pity.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Abu ­ Mahendra
Senior Member
368 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2013
     
Apr 20, 2014 21:02 |  #197
bannedPermanent ban

Apples and Oranges. I don't know why you guys allow yourselves to be suckered into the bokeh vs. sharpness debate. On one hand, bokeh quality is subjective and unquantifiable. One man's "nervous" is another's "creamy". On the other hand, resolution and accutance are objective and quantifiable. For so long as you persist in entertaining such debate, you are playing into the hands of the bokeh quality crowd whose "arguments" you will never be able to disprove because they are cannot be proved or disproved. They are personal and subjective.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CaliWalkabout
Senior Member
Avatar
337 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2010
Location: Oakland, CA, USA
     
Apr 20, 2014 22:32 |  #198

Abu Mahendra wrote in post #16849113 (external link)
They are personal and subjective.

So is photography, and all art.


6D, 17-40L, 24L II, 50L, 100L, 70-300L.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,580 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 3768
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Apr 20, 2014 22:32 |  #199

CaliWalkabout wrote in post #16849270 (external link)
So is photography, and all art.

This.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T // XF 18mm f2 // XF 35mm f1.4 // XF 60mm f2.4 // Rokinon 12mm f2 // Rokinon 21mm f1.4 // XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 // XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 // Rokinon 85mm f1.4 // Zhonghi Lensturbo ii // Various adapted MF lenses
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
snake0ape
Goldmember
Avatar
1,223 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 11
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
     
Apr 20, 2014 22:34 |  #200

Abu Mahendra wrote in post #16849113 (external link)
Apples and Oranges. I don't know why you guys allow yourselves to be suckered into the bokeh vs. sharpness debate. On one hand, bokeh quality is subjective and unquantifiable. One man's "nervous" is another's "creamy". On the other hand, resolution and accutance are objective and quantifiable. For so long as you persist in entertaining such debate, you are playing into the hands of the bokeh quality crowd whose "arguments" you will never be able to disprove because they are disprovable. They are personal and subjective.

You must agree that quantifiable things is not everything. And how else would you judge subjective things so that they too are on the "table" for discussion. Yes, not everything can be counted like beans, but that does not mean it should not be discussed. The topic here is about the lens quality and part of that discussion has to be bokeh.


5Diii | 50D | 8-15L 4| 16-35L 2.8 II| 24-70L 2.8 II | 70-200L 2.8 IS II |Tamy 150-600 | Σ35Art 1.4 | 40 2.8 | Σ50Art 1.4 | 85L 1.2 II | 100 2.8 Macro | Helios 44-3 58mm f2.0 |Helios 40-1 85mm f1.5 | 1.4x & 2x teleconverters

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Abu ­ Mahendra
Senior Member
368 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2013
     
Apr 20, 2014 23:59 as a reply to  @ CaliWalkabout's post |  #201
bannedPermanent ban

I'd say you are a quarter right for not all photography is art. Only some photography can be considered art. In any case, the capturing of electromagnetic radiation in the visible range of the human eye on a wafer of silicon, reconfiguring the electric potential at each site into a coherent image and rendering it on an electronic screen is first and foremost a technical effort grounded squarely on the quantifiable and on science and engineering.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Abu ­ Mahendra
Senior Member
368 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2013
     
Apr 21, 2014 00:04 as a reply to  @ snake0ape's post |  #202
bannedPermanent ban

None of what I said earlier could or should be interpreted to admit such philistinism. My point earlier is that the bokeh vs. sharpness debate is a false dichotomy at its most fundamental level for it is a comparison or zero-sum battle between the subjective and objective. Two, engaging in such a debate is not only conceptually flawed, but in practice the deck is stacked against the objectivists because the arguments deployed by the subjectivists can never be tested objectively, much less disproven. Therefore such debate is, as evidenced by the plethora of staid threads on this forum about the subject, sterile. But if you insist on beating a dead unicorn...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
snake0ape
Goldmember
Avatar
1,223 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 11
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
     
Apr 21, 2014 00:23 |  #203

Abu. You are over thinking. Who is debating between sharpness vs bokeh? This lens is designed and engineered to render sharp wide open and is also designed and engineered to render quality bokeh. When designing for both, there are compromises between the two. Keep in mind, it is designed for professional photographers in mind. So its not sharpness vs bokeh, it is about how good this 50mm lens compared to the other lens designed for the same purpose in mind. So both qualities must be discussed, don't you think?


5Diii | 50D | 8-15L 4| 16-35L 2.8 II| 24-70L 2.8 II | 70-200L 2.8 IS II |Tamy 150-600 | Σ35Art 1.4 | 40 2.8 | Σ50Art 1.4 | 85L 1.2 II | 100 2.8 Macro | Helios 44-3 58mm f2.0 |Helios 40-1 85mm f1.5 | 1.4x & 2x teleconverters

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,580 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 3768
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Apr 21, 2014 00:43 |  #204

Abu Mahendra wrote in post #16849432 (external link)
I'd say you are a quarter right for not all photography is art. Only some photography can be considered art. In any case, the capturing of electromagnetic radiation in the visible range of the human eye on a wafer of silicon, reconfiguring the electric potential at each site into a coherent image and rendering it on an electronic screen is first and foremost a technical effort grounded squarely on the quantifiable and on science and engineering.

I disagree.

Photography is not the same as just taking photos. Photography is the artistic process of creating an image. Someone taking snapshots or quick photos of things simply to record something they see wouldn't refer to it as "photography", I think it's pretty generally understood that photography is the art behind taking photos.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T // XF 18mm f2 // XF 35mm f1.4 // XF 60mm f2.4 // Rokinon 12mm f2 // Rokinon 21mm f1.4 // XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 // XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 // Rokinon 85mm f1.4 // Zhonghi Lensturbo ii // Various adapted MF lenses
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Apr 21, 2014 00:48 |  #205

Abu Mahendra wrote in post #16849113 (external link)
Apples and Oranges. I don't know why you guys allow yourselves to be suckered into the bokeh vs. sharpness debate. On one hand, bokeh quality is subjective and unquantifiable. One man's "nervous" is another's "creamy". On the other hand, resolution and accutance are objective and quantifiable. For so long as you persist in entertaining such debate, you are playing into the hands of the bokeh quality crowd whose "arguments" you will never be able to disprove because they are cannot be proved or disproved. They are personal and subjective.

The amount of sharpness required to make a "high quality" photo is as subjective as bokeh, honestly.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
snake0ape
Goldmember
Avatar
1,223 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 11
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
     
Apr 21, 2014 00:59 |  #206

tkbslc wrote in post #16849474 (external link)
The amount of sharpness required to make a "high quality" photo is as subjective as bokeh, honestly.

Very true. Especially when dots on a grid are patterned to look like border lines, edges, colors and shades.


5Diii | 50D | 8-15L 4| 16-35L 2.8 II| 24-70L 2.8 II | 70-200L 2.8 IS II |Tamy 150-600 | Σ35Art 1.4 | 40 2.8 | Σ50Art 1.4 | 85L 1.2 II | 100 2.8 Macro | Helios 44-3 58mm f2.0 |Helios 40-1 85mm f1.5 | 1.4x & 2x teleconverters

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Abu ­ Mahendra
Senior Member
368 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2013
     
Apr 21, 2014 01:56 |  #207
bannedPermanent ban

tkbslc wrote in post #16849474 (external link)
The amount of sharpness required to make a "high quality" photo is as subjective as bokeh, honestly.

True, but that is neither here nor there for the discussion here. The subject of discussion here is not how much sharpness is needed for an image, but rather how the lens used to capture the images measures in terms of resolution (vs. bokeh). Strawman.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Abu ­ Mahendra
Senior Member
368 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2013
     
Apr 21, 2014 02:01 |  #208
bannedPermanent ban

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16849470 (external link)
I disagree.

Photography is not the same as just taking photos. Photography is the artistic process of creating an image. Someone taking snapshots or quick photos of things simply to record something they see wouldn't refer to it as "photography", I think it's pretty generally understood that photography is the art behind taking photos.

No. In intelligence and in the military, for example, you have the term "aerial photography" or "surveillance photography", both of which has nothing to do directly or deliberately with art or artistic pursuits. Photography can be an art, a technology or both.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Apr 21, 2014 02:36 |  #209

Photography literally means "light writing". The amount of art or thought you want to put into what you write with light is all up to you.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Apr 21, 2014 02:42 |  #210

Abu Mahendra wrote in post #16849540 (external link)
True, but that is neither here nor there for the discussion here. The subject of discussion here is not how much sharpness is needed for an image, but rather how the lens used to capture the images measures in terms of resolution (vs. bokeh). Strawman.

The discussion is about whether lens X is better than lens Y. It's 100% relevant. If both lenses give me a sharp enough image, the the max resolution (which is also largely sensor dependent) is irrelevant for anything but bragging rights. And besides, who says you get to define the limits of the discussion?

Car A may be 50% faster than Car B, but if both exceed the maximum speed I intend to drive, Car A is not better simply because it is faster and I might pick Car B because it is more fun to drive or a like the way it looks.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

180,437 views & 0 likes for this thread
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM (Art) is finally here!
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is affordabledi
834 guests, 218 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.