Better to Have Loved and Lost a Cheap Lens Than to Have Never Tried One At All
A lot of people may be offended by this story. They call me a snob and a purist. Indeed, I had the privilege to try out both premium and cheap lenses for one of the more expensive camera systems on the market. Nevertheless, I hope you keep reading because the central thesis is that third-party photography lenses are not necessarily bad but they are limited as to the number of applications or situations where they can be used.
I wrote earlier about shooting with three different 50mm lenses, each bringing a unique quality to the final image. Some refer to these qualities as “medium format feel” or “Hollywood glamour portraits.” Aficionados can tell you which lens a portrait was shot with based on the bokeh and light fall from the subject. This eliminates the crux of my argument: if you can bring all the gear you want to the location, then the right combination of “subprime” lenses, as I shall call them, will get the job done. Suppose your carry-on is limited to just a minimal kit and you are traveling to capture impressions at a once-in-a-lifetime destination. In that case, a premium prime will ensure this opportunity will not be squandered.
Wildlife and sports photographer exemplify the latter situation. They rent their 600–1600 mm lenses for each job. So do movie directors. We amateurs, who are not paid for taking photos, are left to make the best of our budget. If there were no budget considerations, everyone would buy the premium product (for a while, Leica was called the dentist’s camera, as only dentists could afford them to snap family pics).
The Foevon sensors and Sigma dp0 Quattro 21mm provides another example. This fixed camera/lens combination generates wide-angle pictures with color intensities that none of the more expensive CMOS-based systems can equal, particularly at long exposures on a tripod. It is, however, inferior to any consumer camera in any other situation if the light/ subject requires more than ISO200. I will take this camera and the tripod in checked luggage on my next outing, but then leave it in the hotel except between 5.00 pm and sunset — no blue hour pictures with this sensor.
The Sigma example brings us back to the main argument. Some lenses shine in niche situations, and these are not the most expensive. Shooting with vintage glass is a recent trend that exploits this insight. One of my 50mm lens designs is a Meyer-Goerliz reissue of their 1934 Cooke design at f 2.8. It is a horrible lens! I cannot get eyelashes sharp no matter which aperture and quickly lose any resolution in the corners. With this lens, you never see pimples on the model’s face. It sells for one-tenth of the price of the Leica APO 50mm f2.0, and it produces one and only one particular look, actually two: it is a dream for macro photography and — if you can get the lighting right — for creating the perfect bubble bokeh behind your model. Most of the year, it stays tucked away in my drawer; only if I go out at night shooting downtown with many small lights in the background do I take it out.
There is a memorable line from “money ball.” The Oakland A’s just lost their star pitcher, Jason Giambi, and have no budget to replace him. So the manager, played by Bratt Pit, decides to “recreate him in the aggregate.” The Oakland A’s hire three players with a combined RBI equal to Jason’s. That is a viable strategy for a lens collection if you can bring all of them with you or foresee particular shooting situations in advance.
Street photography is another specific shooting situation where planning can help a lot. Any Voigtlander lens stepped down to f8 or f10 will do the trick if I am out on a sunny day. Street photography does not care about shallow depth of field, only about sharpness across the entire image. I leave it to the aficionados to debate whether 28, 35, or 50 mm is the preferred focal length. Personally, I oscillate between a 24mm/f3.8 Elmar or a 90mm/f2 Voigtlander APO, depending on how narrow the streets are. However, if I only have time to shoot at night after dinner with the family, I want a 28mm/f1.5 Sumilux. That is not an inexpensive lens.
What are we left with after this discussion? If you can plan ahead and define the situation and look ahead of time, then the right, “cheap” lens will give you outstanding results. If you can bring many lenses and have the time to change out, you can achieve stellar results — in the aggregate. What a premium prime gives us is freedom and flexibility. You carry one lens, and each shot (panorama or portrait, day or night) will be of a quality to hang on the wall.
<< all pictures by the author >>
