Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lenses
General Lenses
Zeiss Lenses of the future...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="STM" data-source="post: 125536" data-attributes="member: 12827"><p>There is no disputing that CZ has made superlative lenses for many decades, my Hasselblad C's and CF's are simply amazing glass, but honestly given the price differential between CZ and Nikkor, which can be <em>substantial</em>, is it reallly cost effective to go with CZ over Nikkor for FX/35mm? Even with the introduction of the D800 and its phenomenal resolving power, I am sure the enlargements would have to be substantial to see any significant differences. If you want to get a D800 because it will let you crop to one small part off the image to make up for your lack of optical horsepower or compositional skills, then I think you should probably need to re-visit your competency level as a photographer first before plunking down a lot of money on a new camera. One of my biggest questions when it comes to people jumping on the 36 MP bandwagon is will they ever <em>really</em> enlarge stuff to the extent that you would actually be able to take advantage of that big jump? Megapixels for megapixels sake is <em>way</em> overrated in my opinion. And it leads into the discussion that so many people seem to get completely wrapped around the axel on all the rest of that <em>el-nerdo techie crap; </em>megapixels, noise, high ISO, blah, blah, blah, ad nauseum, that they forget that the camera, regardless of is simplicity or complexity, is in its most basic form, still nothing but a <em>mere</em> <em>recording device</em>. Always has been and always will be. It is what the person <em>holding</em> that recording device does with it that makes the difference between some rank amateur level snapshot that looks like it was taken by your half blind Aunt Bertha with a disposable Kodak she got at Walgreens, or a truly memorable image. Someone with superior photographic skills could take one of those plastic <em>HOLGAS</em> and simply blow the doors off someone with their fancy D4 if they don't have a good understanding of the basic principles of photography. My D700, at a "paltry" 12 MP enlarges quite nicely to 16x20 and even beyond to 24x30 with my best glass, like the 105mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.4 AIS's.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="STM, post: 125536, member: 12827"] There is no disputing that CZ has made superlative lenses for many decades, my Hasselblad C's and CF's are simply amazing glass, but honestly given the price differential between CZ and Nikkor, which can be [I]substantial[/I], is it reallly cost effective to go with CZ over Nikkor for FX/35mm? Even with the introduction of the D800 and its phenomenal resolving power, I am sure the enlargements would have to be substantial to see any significant differences. If you want to get a D800 because it will let you crop to one small part off the image to make up for your lack of optical horsepower or compositional skills, then I think you should probably need to re-visit your competency level as a photographer first before plunking down a lot of money on a new camera. One of my biggest questions when it comes to people jumping on the 36 MP bandwagon is will they ever [I]really[/I] enlarge stuff to the extent that you would actually be able to take advantage of that big jump? Megapixels for megapixels sake is [I]way[/I] overrated in my opinion. And it leads into the discussion that so many people seem to get completely wrapped around the axel on all the rest of that [I]el-nerdo techie crap; [/I]megapixels, noise, high ISO, blah, blah, blah, ad nauseum, that they forget that the camera, regardless of is simplicity or complexity, is in its most basic form, still nothing but a [I]mere[/I] [I]recording device[/I]. Always has been and always will be. It is what the person [I]holding[/I] that recording device does with it that makes the difference between some rank amateur level snapshot that looks like it was taken by your half blind Aunt Bertha with a disposable Kodak she got at Walgreens, or a truly memorable image. Someone with superior photographic skills could take one of those plastic [I]HOLGAS[/I] and simply blow the doors off someone with their fancy D4 if they don't have a good understanding of the basic principles of photography. My D700, at a "paltry" 12 MP enlarges quite nicely to 16x20 and even beyond to 24x30 with my best glass, like the 105mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.4 AIS's. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
General Lenses
Zeiss Lenses of the future...
Top