Every photographer who gets serious about the craft figures this out sooner or later. All the features of the best camera body means nothing if you don’t have a good, sharp lens. High resolution? Nah, that just uses memory. Better burst modes? Nope, again, more data to take up hard drive storage. Improved shutter lag? Important, but if the photo isn’t crisp and sharp, who cares?
When it comes down to it, a lens that remains sharp at all zoom distances is the feature that’s going to get you more usable photos. Yes, these lenses are the expensive ones, and for good reason. Good glass ain’t cheap. But good glass is what you need to create sharp, crisp images with creamy bokeh (blurred background).
And the new Nikon in my kit bag has vividly proven this to be so.
Yes, the Sony Alpha 700 was a fine unit, while it worked. But the drawback was that there is a very limited scope of available lenses, so to get the focal length and zoom I needed at a price I could afford (less than $1,000), I used a third-party 28-300 zoom. It was capable and produced acceptable photos, but the wildlife shots-of those birds in the distance-were never usable. They were always too soft and lacked definition.
The new Nikon came with a 18-200 zoom. I admit I was concerned I would not get the range of distance I needed for the wildlife photos I so enjoy when I am shooting for myself. After just a couple of outings, I have been pleasantly surprised. Take a look at the images below.
This tern is a good shot. I captured it with the 28-300 lens as I was riding a ferry on Block Island Sound. Taken at a zoom of 100 mm, the image is sharp, and clearly shows the type of bird, but the detail in the eye, beak and feathers is not a crisp as it could or should be. Now check out this one below:
This comical image of a two herons was taken with the 18-200 on the Nikon. The resolution of the cameras used are similar, but this one was taken at 200 mm-racked all the way out-usually not the sharpest point on the lens. Notice the detail of the feathers on both birds and the eye and beak on the white one? True, it is lighter and therefore easier to see, but check out the crop below:
See the detail on the beak? In the feathers? And, you can see the eye. Yes there are some issues with purple fringing, but the 28-300 has the problem too.
The bottom line here? Instead of upgrading your camera body every time there is a new feature included, invest your money in the best lenses you can afford. It’s the glass that makes the difference. Not the newest, shiniest, fanciest camera.
Have you learned something unexpected about your gear? Leave a comment and let us know about it!
Recent Comments