04-23-2017, 03:17 PM
Quote:While I didn't want to go into the details, my point is that handheld you won't in most cases exploit the full potential of a lens, unless you are in ideal conditions. The influence of poor lighting on image quality handheld, is greater than lens quality itself.
Aside that I totally agree with you "marginally better in lab tests" doesn't really mean any difference in quality would be noticeable on prints.
As to your first point: that is true indeed, with any camera, any lens.
As to seeing differences in print: I am sure you will see more difference from a camera with 50 MP vs a camera with 25 MP, using the same lens, in print, than from a lens wihich is marginally better. What a lot of people still do not realize, is that sensors are not as sharp, resolution wise, as most (reasonable to good) lenses. As a result, upping sensor resolution provides more detail
.Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....