Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-26-2010, 10:51 AM   #16
Veteran Member
VaughnA's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Virginia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,363
Maybe this is a psychological exercise instead of lens or photography related. That seems more plausible than getting anything useful from analyzing the photos.

07-26-2010, 11:13 AM   #17
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
first, this is a forum where ideas and opinions are freely expressed. nobody sets the rules but no one is being rude to you. pardon me, but it's obvious that you are being defensive that most people, if not all find your experiment not worth the trouble. you ask for opinion, you got some. you cant choose opinions that only favor your satisfaction. experiments do fail and is not always is a good one. and frankly speaking, this experiment is not a good one. so dont take this personally.

Peter had already mentioned the reasons why, you might as well contemplate on what he said rather than argue your case or tell people to agree with you.

if I were to give a real opinion on this matter, I would say:

1.> the experiment lacks detail that any participating party would be left completely dumbfounded.

2.> you refuse to give detail of the experiment which could had helped clarify the experiment.

3.> your agenda is uncertain.
07-26-2010, 11:31 AM   #18
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,126
This is a waste of time except that it gives me a chance to repeat two maxims:
It is easy to take bad photos with a good lens/camera


A bad lens/camera does not mean bad photos

Steve
07-26-2010, 11:34 AM   #19
Veteran Member
wshi's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Illinois
Posts: 455
I'll say my opinion, which is largely echoing what has already been said and what I believe you already can see.

Sharpness looks perfectly fine for web usage. These images are pretty small, but even the corners look okay.

Contrast is low, but looking at the last few images where you've bumped up the contrast (i'm assuming), the images look great.

Quite prone to flare and washing out of colors and contrast when shooting towards the sun, so the lens probably has poor coatings. Probably not an SMC lens then.

"Okay" CA control in the center, and looks much worse in the corners.

Distortion looks okay to me, but I'm bad at judging this.

Overall, it seems like a fine lens as long as you don't shoot into the sun and do some curves adjustments in PP. I have no idea what lens it could be, so I'll just guess that it's a generic Vivitar 28mm f/2.8 without close focusing.

07-26-2010, 03:07 PM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NYC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,071
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
first, this is a forum where ideas and opinions are freely expressed. nobody sets the rules but no one is being rude to you. pardon me, but it's obvious that you are being defensive that most people, if not all find your experiment not worth the trouble. you ask for opinion, you got some. you cant choose opinions that only favor your satisfaction. experiments do fail and is not always is a good one. and frankly speaking, this experiment is not a good one. so dont take this personally.

Peter had already mentioned the reasons why, you might as well contemplate on what he said rather than argue your case or tell people to agree with you.

if I were to give a real opinion on this matter, I would say:

1.> the experiment lacks detail that any participating party would be left completely dumbfounded.

2.> you refuse to give detail of the experiment which could had helped clarify the experiment.

3.> your agenda is uncertain.
I'm asking for opinions on the image quality, not how well I'm running an experiment. Why is that so hard to understand? If you don't want to play, that's perfectly fine, no one is forcing you to. Just don't waste your breath trying to tell me how to run a proper lens test, I know how to and this isn't that.

It's quite ironic that someone will waste their time and my time by telling me what a waste this experiment is.

I think you got #2 and #3 right though. Not all experiments and polls require the participants to know every single detail. A lot of experiments require the subjects to be completely oblivious to the real point of the experiment. I'm completely dumbfounded as to why that concept is SO HARD to get through people's head?

It's my fault after all, I should have dumbed it down and just used a poll so nobody would waste their breath trying to tell me how to do something that they're totally oblivious to.
07-26-2010, 03:09 PM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NYC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,071
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by wshi Quote
I'll say my opinion, which is largely echoing what has already been said and what I believe you already can see.

Sharpness looks perfectly fine for web usage. These images are pretty small, but even the corners look okay.

Contrast is low, but looking at the last few images where you've bumped up the contrast (i'm assuming), the images look great.

Quite prone to flare and washing out of colors and contrast when shooting towards the sun, so the lens probably has poor coatings. Probably not an SMC lens then.

"Okay" CA control in the center, and looks much worse in the corners.

Distortion looks okay to me, but I'm bad at judging this.

Overall, it seems like a fine lens as long as you don't shoot into the sun and do some curves adjustments in PP. I have no idea what lens it could be, so I'll just guess that it's a generic Vivitar 28mm f/2.8 without close focusing.
Thanks for your response, I concur with your opinion but I'm most curious as to:

Do you like how this lens renders an image? If yes, why? If not, why not?
07-26-2010, 03:19 PM   #22
Veteran Member
Lloydy's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Shropshire, UK
Posts: 1,114
my 'Super Travenar 28mm' cost me 2, and is famous for it's mediocrity.



So I'll throw that in for a suggestion.
07-26-2010, 03:26 PM   #23
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Carradale, Scotland
Posts: 289
muddy, dull, soft

Lost track of the point of this thread, but it is difficult to make any assessment of the images, since many of them are muddy, soft and lacking in contrast. Your experiment may be important to you, but I cant generate any enthusiasm for it. I stand by my original statement that I believe it to be a waste of bandwidth and pointless.

IMO the purpose of post-processing is to produce the best image (subjective, I realise this) possible, either to reproduce the scene as remembered at the point of taking the image, or for some other artistic or technical endeavour. I see no artistic or technical endeavour consistently applied to your sample images and still fail to see the point of the experiment.

When you enlist the help of intelligent people by asking for opinions, it would be polite to explain the rationale behind the experiment, or else it just becomes a childish guessing game, which is how it appears to me.

Not trying to be rude or obstructive, just giving you my input in as polite a manner as I can.

07-26-2010, 04:19 PM   #24
Pentaxian
Moderator Emeritus




Join Date: May 2007
Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,648
Your follow up question was "do you like how it renders an image?" I can definetly say "MAYBE". The chair shot and the last 2 images have potential and seem to show that this lens could be capable of good stuff in certain situations. So I think it can but as others have stated, there's some fringing here and contrast issues.
07-26-2010, 04:49 PM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NYC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,071
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by keithlester Quote
Lost track of the point of this thread, but it is difficult to make any assessment of the images, since many of them are muddy, soft and lacking in contrast. Your experiment may be important to you, but I cant generate any enthusiasm for it. I stand by my original statement that I believe it to be a waste of bandwidth and pointless.

IMO the purpose of post-processing is to produce the best image (subjective, I realise this) possible, either to reproduce the scene as remembered at the point of taking the image, or for some other artistic or technical endeavour. I see no artistic or technical endeavour consistently applied to your sample images and still fail to see the point of the experiment.

When you enlist the help of intelligent people by asking for opinions, it would be polite to explain the rationale behind the experiment, or else it just becomes a childish guessing game, which is how it appears to me.

Not trying to be rude or obstructive, just giving you my input in as polite a manner as I can.
That's fine, you don't have to waste your precious bandwidth by looking at this thread. Move along then.
07-26-2010, 04:51 PM   #26
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NYC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,071
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Peter Zack Quote
Your follow up question was "do you like how it renders an image?" I can definetly say "MAYBE". The chair shot and the last 2 images have potential and seem to show that this lens could be capable of good stuff in certain situations. So I think it can but as others have stated, there's some fringing here and contrast issues.
Thank you for your unbiased answers despite our disagreements on several points. I appreciate that....

Would this be a lens you'd want to use for your shooting assignments or personal artistic shoots?
07-26-2010, 06:30 PM   #27
Veteran Member
Derridale's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 412
In a word - no.

But I tend to agree with most of the other posters - you're asking people to make judgements with no information at all. Pure guesswork. What is the value of that in ANY experiment or poll? What are we trying to determine?

And as for bandwidth - you may be hosting the pictures on your server, but many of us DO pay for bandwidth. Here in Australia, virtually all of our ISP plans have an allocation of total bandwidth per month, and many, including the biggest (Telstra and Optus) charge for total bandwidth - i.e. UPloads as well as downloads. While the total used by your photos isn't really all that much in the grand scheme of things, it may be relevant to those on lower volume plans, or for those on dial-up (yes, there are still a lot of those). But I appreciate that you did warn that there were a lot of photos.

So - are you going to enlighten us all as to the result? What was the lens used? and what answers you were seeking from the assembled multitude?

Last edited by Derridale; 07-26-2010 at 07:52 PM.
07-26-2010, 06:43 PM   #28
Pentaxian
Moderator Emeritus




Join Date: May 2007
Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,648
QuoteOriginally posted by hangu Quote

Would this be a lens you'd want to use for your shooting assignments or personal artistic shoots?
Well again without any info, this is an answer based on a guess. I assume it's an MF lens and have no idea if it's automatic AE or not. So based on that, I have to say no. I've enjoyed using all my Taks and other MF lenses but recently sold almost all of them. I've concentrated my lenses to the best AF in the range.

For work, I need speed in both aperture and AF. The lens needs to be sharp, very little CA's, distortions and fringing. So this wouldn't do.

So what lens?
07-26-2010, 06:47 PM   #29
Veteran Member
wshi's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Illinois
Posts: 455
I think that the lens is capable of rendering beautiful images in the right situations and with the appropriate PP. Other times, it will be a hindrance and you'll have to put in significant work to make a good image. As far as a raw, unedited shot from this lens, I don't think it's particularly remarkable in the way it renders images.
07-26-2010, 06:56 PM   #30
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by keithlester Quote
Lost track of the point of this thread, but it is difficult to make any assessment of the images, since many of them are muddy, soft and lacking in contrast. Your experiment may be important to you, but I cant generate any enthusiasm for it. I stand by my original statement that I believe it to be a waste of bandwidth and pointless.

IMO the purpose of post-processing is to produce the best image (subjective, I realise this) possible, either to reproduce the scene as remembered at the point of taking the image, or for some other artistic or technical endeavour. I see no artistic or technical endeavour consistently applied to your sample images and still fail to see the point of the experiment.

When you enlist the help of intelligent people by asking for opinions, it would be polite to explain the rationale behind the experiment, or else it just becomes a childish guessing game, which is how it appears to me.

Not trying to be rude or obstructive, just giving you my input in as polite a manner as I can.

same sentiments that I have. now it's up to the OP how he interprets the opinions presented to him. maybe he can learn something from it and make it clear the next time he presents an experiment about a lens? post-processing effect? guessing game? a poll? how you can make an image look ugly? etc....

because at the moment, I'm really lost as to what the purpose of this thread since the OP is giving a lot of mixed ideas that even Einstein won't be able to comprehend. make your point clear and make up your mind.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
experiment, images, k-mount, lens, mystery, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Travel I'm Alive & Now I Present My Taste Of Egypt (warning lots of photos, please enjoy) Christopher M.W.T Post Your Photos! 33 05-16-2010 12:53 PM
Photos from amateur exhibition I entered... (Lots of pics..Warning) Wildfire_ja Post Your Photos! 4 06-04-2009 12:18 PM
RMNP Pictures (WARNING lots of flowers) jbrowning Post Your Photos! 4 08-05-2008 06:26 AM
lots of photos celetron Post Your Photos! 4 02-29-2008 04:08 AM
Lots of Photos! egordon99 Post Your Photos! 5 09-06-2007 09:52 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:05 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top