In praise of inferior lenses (the very wide range zooms)
Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2018 2:15 am
I must admit to being a lens snob. When I bought my first Sony A-mount DSLR, the A350, I bought the Sony 18-250mm general purpose wide range zoom to go along with it. Since then every time I've bought a new lens my intention was to improve the image quality. So I bought narrower range wider aperture zooms, and primes.
When I'd replaced the general walk-about opportunistic snapping range of the 18-250mm zoom with the superior 16-50mm and 70-300mm I shelved the 18-250mm and started walking around with the two better lenses. I soon got fed up with missing good unexpected photo opportunities because I happened to have the wrong lens on the camera and no time to change it. I tried carrying two cameras so I didn't have to change lenses but it was a bit too much weight and bulk when I was just going out to do some shopping. So I dropped back to the good old 18-250mm as the lens to use when I was carrying the camera around just in case a good photo opportunity turned up.
When I upgraded my camera to the 24MP A77 I expected to find that my best lenses would show an improvement in detail resolution, but that the 24MP wouldn't improve the images of the 18-250mm, just reveal its flaws. I was surprised to discover that 24MP did improve the images from the 18-250mm, not as much as my better lenses improved, but an improvement nonetheless.
When the Tamron 16-300mm came out I was intrigued. I wasn't sure if it would offer any noticeable improvement in image quality over my old 18-250mm, but the extra range would definitely increase its versatility. When I was lucky enough to win a ticket to walk over the new Forth Road Bridge before it was opened to traffic (and closed to pedestrians) that was just the excuse I needed to buy the 16-300mm. Even odder was that one of the best shots I got on that trip was a photograph of the bridge taken from the top of a moving double decker bus through the not entirely clean or flawless window glass.
Queensferry Bridge in perspective by Chris Malcolm, on Flickr
As often happens, content trumps image quality.
The 300mm end of this 16-300mm is a bit suspect. As often happens with such wide range zooms, the longest end is a bit of a push, often offering no more detail resolution than pulling back a bit, more of a composition aid than extra reach. So I when I found myself unexpectedly sitting near some dramatic near sunset lighting effects with the 16-300mm on the camera I took this 300mm photograph more as an experimental note to come back one evening with a better lens and a tripod. It turned out surprisingly well, being capable of producing an impressive A3 print.
Misty sunset approaches Inchmickery Island by Chris Malcolm, on Flickr
As often happens, lighting and content trumps image quality. And this was a very transient effect. Within 15 seconds it had gone. I could go back there 100 times with a better lens and a tripod and never see that again. So I'm becoming less of a lens snob. If someone comes out with a 14-400mm zoom I'll study the reviews with great interest
When I'd replaced the general walk-about opportunistic snapping range of the 18-250mm zoom with the superior 16-50mm and 70-300mm I shelved the 18-250mm and started walking around with the two better lenses. I soon got fed up with missing good unexpected photo opportunities because I happened to have the wrong lens on the camera and no time to change it. I tried carrying two cameras so I didn't have to change lenses but it was a bit too much weight and bulk when I was just going out to do some shopping. So I dropped back to the good old 18-250mm as the lens to use when I was carrying the camera around just in case a good photo opportunity turned up.
When I upgraded my camera to the 24MP A77 I expected to find that my best lenses would show an improvement in detail resolution, but that the 24MP wouldn't improve the images of the 18-250mm, just reveal its flaws. I was surprised to discover that 24MP did improve the images from the 18-250mm, not as much as my better lenses improved, but an improvement nonetheless.
When the Tamron 16-300mm came out I was intrigued. I wasn't sure if it would offer any noticeable improvement in image quality over my old 18-250mm, but the extra range would definitely increase its versatility. When I was lucky enough to win a ticket to walk over the new Forth Road Bridge before it was opened to traffic (and closed to pedestrians) that was just the excuse I needed to buy the 16-300mm. Even odder was that one of the best shots I got on that trip was a photograph of the bridge taken from the top of a moving double decker bus through the not entirely clean or flawless window glass.
Queensferry Bridge in perspective by Chris Malcolm, on Flickr
As often happens, content trumps image quality.
The 300mm end of this 16-300mm is a bit suspect. As often happens with such wide range zooms, the longest end is a bit of a push, often offering no more detail resolution than pulling back a bit, more of a composition aid than extra reach. So I when I found myself unexpectedly sitting near some dramatic near sunset lighting effects with the 16-300mm on the camera I took this 300mm photograph more as an experimental note to come back one evening with a better lens and a tripod. It turned out surprisingly well, being capable of producing an impressive A3 print.
Misty sunset approaches Inchmickery Island by Chris Malcolm, on Flickr
As often happens, lighting and content trumps image quality. And this was a very transient effect. Within 15 seconds it had gone. I could go back there 100 times with a better lens and a tripod and never see that again. So I'm becoming less of a lens snob. If someone comes out with a 14-400mm zoom I'll study the reviews with great interest