I know there are many factors that are taken into consideration in producing a good quality photo. However I've been bothered by this notion that lens too plays an important role. But how far is this from truth? I'm a beginner who owns an entry level Sony A300 camera with 2 lenses (18-70mm F3.5-5.6 lens kit & 55-200mm Telephoto lens kit). I've been snapping photos but somehow I could not get the quality desired. (I even applied other techniques possible) Is it the camera? Will it make any difference if I change the lenses?

I got to the point where I almost gave up photography...until I found out about EOS 60D...

nothing to with lens or brand ...all about skill problem.

sometimes yes, if you're taking pictures for work, clients might wanna ask u to get things sharp for them. but in most cases which is non work related, its not much of a difference, as skill does matter, literally.

No matter how, for taking picture, need skill 1st...

yes...100% yes

well... before you jump into thoughts that your slr or your lens or both of them are the culprits and good photos must be from a D3x(sorry i am nikonian)

maybe its time you snap back to the basics... starting with how you hold your SLR, you grip, your posture, your center of gravity etc... a lot of times, me included... bad picture comes from unstable posture...

cheers mate!

1. Skills
2. Lenses
3. Cam Body

A pro photographer can snap BEAUTIFUL pictures with a compact cam. You have a DSLR, Why not?

Yes. Lenses does affect the image quality. It would be absurd to say that lenses does not affect image quality. If that were true why would people pay thousands upon thousands of dollars to get premium lenses?

Quality premium lenses do affect image quality. They will give you sharper pictures and render your image with more contrast.

Talking about Sony DSLRs and Carl Zeiss lenses, have you ever looked through a Zeiss lens? The first time I looked through a Zeiss lens, I immediately noticed the color difference that the Zeiss lens produces as compared to a kit lens. That is merely by peering through the viewfinder. When taking pics I noticed that certain colors tend to pop out better using a Zeiss lens.

Other than that premium lenses also gives you better CA and flaring controls and will mostly offer better bokeh. Thus using the same body with different lenses will affect your output to some extent.

It's always better to pair low end body with premium lenses than to pair high end bodies with cheap kit lenses.

Yes off course. U can only get so much from kitlens. There's a reason for premium glasses.

Also, depending on your technique, understanding the character of a lens (MTF,CA, why some lenses perform better when stepped down, etc)

TS please post your pics and kindly let us know why can't your current lens satisfy you.

Not agree, 1st is skill, 2nd i think is $$

yeah i want to see too. lol

yalor..if price is cheaper & everybody can afford a good lens..everyone can make good photos..then pro's susah cari makan

please note, good picture quality photos doesnt equals to good photos with good composition, exposure, moment, etc.

+1
watch this video to understand more

if you ever try a f2.8 lens you'll noticed the quality immediately

1. if you think like that, then clearly you're not grasping photography properly yet.

2. and based on the above, if you can't snap properly with your A300 then i don't see how you can do better with a 60D.

should read this http://www.goldfries.com/photography/just-...grade-buy-next/ which I think applies to you (and many people)

yeah right, probably just a little more creamy bokeh that gets the newbies all wet but in reality it's not like that.

it's a widespread misconception that as long as the lens is f2.8 and constant aperture = it's all good! IT IS NOT.

there are plenty of crappy f2.8 constant aperture lens out there.

look at Canon 28-300L. no f2.8 and no constant aperture. superb lens.

the quality of image captured, are determined by the quality elements used in the lens build (eg, good glasses) - not determined by being wide aperture.

---

Added on October 28, 2010, 5:05 pmtake note of this post guys.

yes. lenses does affect image quality, as in the details and colors. less "side effects" like CA and barrel distortions and whatever else.

the only thing is to understand what you need.

there's no reason to go pro-grade lens if you're shooting for fun but if you're doing business, then a decent glass is always helpful.

if $$$$ is not an issue, getting a cheaper glass is fine but make sure you know how to work around it. there is always a limitation.

He's talking about IQ. Not composition or etc

Yes TS. It does affect

lol. look at TS's question. he complains that his a300 n kit lens can't perform up to his high standards. fine. i accept that.

but look at his final sentence, "after i discovered 60D "..

lol wut..if TS say 'after i discovered Zeiss/L/Nikkor lenses'..then i understand...but switching to another brand and body can improve IQ(technically yes), i can't quite comprehend. but its another question altogether.

so the biggest question now is, what do TS really wanna know? if he thinks that 60D solves his problem then there's no point to this thread as we all have different views and non is definite because we all stood by those views and take photos.

=D thats all we can do.. If TS wants 60D we can't do anything.

It affects sharpness and distortion. Very important if you doing commercial work.

Oh no, it doesn't. Of course not, why else would one spend thousands of dollars on lenses? Clearly it doesn't affect picture quality.

Yeah.

lololol. sorry i just read the title then straight to the comments. i just read his statement.

yeah true, swapping to the canon will improve the quality a bit, but it's ur technical skills handling the camera during compositions and etc that improves the picture most

if u use the most expensive lens out there, but ur composition sucks, there's no point

To me lenses do affect the photo output. Being a prime user here, I can tell you I hardly tolerate with soft photos
Trying to get rid of this as I start using zoom lenses to cover my daily needs for assignment.

why would it be so?

doesn't Sony have the new range of Alpha series and a bunch of Zeiss lens already?

in fact A300 is such a competent camera. Even my little dino 350D with cheapo 50mm f1.8 II and 18-55 IS lens can take photos with decent quality to be accepted in stock photo sites.

so what more an A300 (which is considered much more advanced than 350D) paired with a few decent lens?

@bold : You have no idea how good Zeiss lens can be. The only reason I will move to Sony is because the Zeiss with AF !

Zeiss lenses are wonderful. The sharpness, the colour!
Zeiss 50mm F2 on Nikon is soo poisonous!

what if i say sony do take picture nicely.
for example, i thnk he did wonderful job with his sony
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gizmo_pony/

i also did try some sony like A200, A330, A550, A700 and i think its a great gadget for start up just ISO noise quite bad compare to other brand in same category. (just my opinion la alpha user dont shoot me~!)

most of sony i tried with cheapo lens only except 50mm F2 carl zeiss. i cant say much about sony pro lens but still with cheapo lens, i still able to get it right with speedlite. btw i freaking love sony speedlite~! the rotation damn cool~!

My friend thought I used a macro lens to take this:



But in actual fact I just used the D90 18105 kitlens.

It's all about how you make use of your existing gear and understand its limitation, find another workaround on it.

You already got 2 good lens there to start with, the telezoom lens is already good enough to snap candids without letting someone know you are taking their pictures, perfect to capture natural emotions, and facial expressions.

In photography you cannot give up very easily. The only way to learn is to take, take and take. Don't feel afraid to experiment. Experimenting is the only way you can discover new horizons in your photos
and that is what makes your photo unique and distinguished. Don't worry about what other people takes. It's all about you, and how you feel about the pic. Most importantly, what makes your pic stands out. Tell a story
from your pic. Feel the light, study how certain lighting condition or composition can actually affects the mood of the person who sees your photo. Portray the mood that you actually feel at the time you snaps the pic.

This post has been edited by geekster129: Oct 28 2010, 08:21 PM

its the truth. but high iso is not a problem now in NEX and the new translucent bodies.

-- edited --

This post has been edited by geekster129: Oct 28 2010, 08:28 PM

yes.... i term of quality it does effected with a good lens if you know how to used it.

but there are quality crap. photography is not all about technical. you have to understand non technical part also to get a good photo.

I never knew switching to a Canon "will improve the quality a bit".

but basing my post on TS's post, he/she asked if lenses contribute to good/bad quality photos -> and to this point I definitely have to agree that a better lens (more expensive tho) will give better quality output (not necessarily a 'better' photo).

Then TS said he almost gave up photography until the unveiling of the EOS 60D... I dont see the connection with the question and the solution. Instead of buying a new camera (which you'll end up with the kitlens 'again'), why not invest of good quality glass?

well, this is only my 2 cents. i could be wrong tho.

Add another few thousand dollar u can buy hubble telescope lens..

somehow i think we got trolled lol

surprisingly NEX was been compare with D90 haha

one off topic question.

Anyone got warning from google chrome when viewing this thread?

yea me too, i wonder why?

Definately does affect the quality, but if you have flash, it will give you even better color and sharpness, however, if you have not enough skills, your photo will be ruin as well...

practice your skills, then talk equipment.