« on: September 29, 2014, 12:26:51 AM »
I'm holding out for the 85mm f/1.0 L, myself. More light, not less. IMO, the notion that sensor improvements negate the value of fast lenses is just silly. Sensor improvements make fast lenses more capable.
Yes. I want to be able use my aperture as much for creative decisions as just technical(exposure). It's baffled me for years hearing the excuse thrown around from manufactures and other photographers alike that we no longer need fast glass because cameras are now capable of ISO speeds in the realm of science fiction when all you had was film or even just 5-10 years ago with digital. Hell, because we have cameras that can shoot in the 100K+ and 200k+ ISO realms, should manufactures just start making all lenses starting at f/8?
Depends, as there are two sides in this. There will always be a need for lenses with large apertures in certain focal lengths for the depth of field effect. However, at the other end, both high-ISO sensors and IS has negated the need for large aperture lenses for pure low-light photography. This means that an 85mm f/1.4 lens makes sense, because the aperture is used for DoF effect (29cm @ 5m); however, a 24mm f/1.4 lens makes absolutely no sense as such a focal length has already way too much DoF for it to be of any artistic value (423cm @ 5m), hence the huge aperture was purely for "available light" - which is not necessary anymore now with 4-stop IS and ISO12800 sensors being "standard".
this is just wrong.
1) IS has no affect on subject motion blur, where F1.4 provides a hell of a faster shutter speed for freezing motion than F2.8 for example (1/50th of a second vs 1/200th).
2) obviously low light photography has been benefitted by new sensors, but that certainly doesn't mean that new sensors negate the benefit of fast glass for low light shooting. I would MUCH rather shoot at F1.4 at night at ISO 1600 than F2.8 at ISO 6400. 1600 is a hell of a lot cleaner than 6400 even if today's 6400 wasn't possible in the days of older sensors.
3) Also ridiculous to say that a 24mm F1.4 doesn't provide shallow enough depth of field for a really pleasing effect when used well. If your subject is close to the lens and the background is a ways back, F1.4 at 24mm can provide great out of focus backgrounds, that are much more melted away and less distracting than shooting at F2.8.
In short, the above post is just perpetuating misinformation! I hope inexperienced photogs aren't mislead by it.