> I find modern primes much sharper than their older counterparts not because of the elements or the optical design, but from the glass directly

Even back in their prime, haha, the Cooke lens leaned into their glass manufacturing by calling it the Cooke Look. All of the things that gave it that look are things modern lenses would consider as issues to correct.

▲

bayindirh an hour ago | parent [-]

Actually, I'm pretty flexible when it comes to how lenses and systems behave. A lens with its unique flaws and look is equally valuable for me as a razor-sharp ultra high-fidelity lens.

All boils down what you want to achieve and what emotion you're trying to create with your photography. Film emulation has gone a long way, but emulating glass is not possible the same way (since you don't have any information about what happened to your photons in their way to your sensor), and lenses are important part of the equation, and will forever be, I think.

▲

dylan604 an hour ago | parent [-]

finally, someone that gets it! these different lenses are all just tools. using the right tool for the job is part of being good at your job.

	▲	bayindirh an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Actually, anything we use is "just tools". IDEs, programming languages, operating systems, text editors, fonts, etc. We all prefer different toolsets due to our differing needs and preferences. Understanding it removes a lot of misunderstanding, anger and confusion from the environment. But, reaching there requires experience, maturity and some insight. Tool suitability is real (you can't drive a screw with a pair of pliers), but the dialogue can be improved a ton with a sprinkle of empathy and understanding.