Whats the overall average lens review rating of your bag? Tongue in Cheek!

calculator01 · 03-22-2013, 07:58 AM

My lenses are all 10's

... At least that's how some people rate them.

**Lowell Goudge** · 03-22-2013, 08:07 AM

aside from the fact than many of my ~55 lenses are either unrated, or so limited in reviews to have a statistically sound rating, I fail to see the point of this exercise at any rate.

the rating system used has been so badly battered for every single lens that has ever been reviewed, based upon so many different points of view that one would question the real value and use of making an average of a completely unreliable rating system in the first place.

besides, at the end of the day it is the photographs we take that matter, not the perceived quality or value of what is in your gadget bag.

I am sure I can take out enough lenses that are so close to 10's in the forum that I can beat anyone on a limited kit rating, but what does it really mean? To me,. nothing at all

**robbiec** · 03-22-2013, 08:12 AM

Originally posted by normhead

I'm not sure what value this is. I use my old Sigma 70-300 Macro for some shots, and it's rated at 7.92, my DA@ 60-250 is rated at 9.62, but in some circumstances the Sigma significantly out performs it. And I wouldn't sell the Sigma based on it's rating. I don't even care what it's rating is, what others may think of it is of little importance. Used for what it's good at, I don't know of a lens that's better.

But I guess as something to kill some time with, it's an interesting question.

I would broadly agree with most of our ratings overall, perhaps some are a point or 2 higher than I would personally rate them, some of the Takumars for example. More granularity would be useful, i.e. being able to give a 9.5 instead of a 10 as if you browse though the comments a few have highlighted that. Also some lens have achieved some sort of cult status and are not allowed to be rated lower than reality

**robbiec** · 03-22-2013, 08:19 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

aside from the fact than many of my ~55 lenses are either unrated, or so limited in reviews to have a statistically sound rating, I fail to see the point of this exercise at any rate.

the rating system used has been so badly battered for every single lens that has ever been reviewed, based upon so many different points of view that one would question the real value and use of making an average of a completely unreliable rating system in the first place.

besides, at the end of the day it is the photographs we take that matter, not the perceived quality or value of what is in your gadget bag.

I am sure I can take out enough lenses that are so close to 10's in the forum that I can beat anyone on a limited kit rating, but what does it really mean? To me,. nothing at all

Lowell, you are taking this way way too seriously. Its an observation, nothing more. The only thing that this thread has highlighted is that I have a bag of lenses that I personally like and use and that the majority of the forum agree. And that I value the reviews from our fellow forum users.

Also, if you have too many 55s that are unrated, how come when you can rate them and share your experience with us?

bassek · 03-22-2013, 08:49 AM - **1 Like**

Well yes, this is a cheeky thing after all, not to be taken seriously. Besides, a LBA shopping spree will increase the Vsc when buying big amounts of lenses.
So I expect someonewith a big lens collection to reach double digit Vsc figures. Someone like RioRico might still be counting and replying next week earliest.

Seb

Franky2step · 03-22-2013, 08:52 AM

Personally I think Pentaxians rate their lenses extremely optimistically. If you haven't used other brands top of the line lenses you prpbably cannot know how good or not good they really are. I say this having used Zeiss, Voigtlander, Canon L, Nikon's top glass, and Pentax FA Ltds. Let the hate begin....lol....serious though

magkelly · 03-22-2013, 08:57 AM

If a lens isn't excellent it's generally not in my bag and really I don't care so much for how they're rated. I've used lenses that were rated very high that IMHO sucked and I've used lenses that were rated far less that I loved. Most rating systems all they care about is how sharp a lens is or occasionally the kind of bokeh it has. To me what exactly constitutes a "good" lens it is so much more than that. In the end it's not about what the lenses are supposedly worth or what quality number has been assigned to them. It's about what I can do with them. When you get right down to it? The "best" rated lenses in my bag aren't actually always the ones that I think are best. I go with what works, with the lens that produces the type of images I'd like to see just then, with my actual experience of how my particular lenses work, not with ratings. That's it.

Last edited by magkelly; 03-22-2013 at 09:04 AM.

causey · 03-22-2013, 09:16 AM

Is this some kind of fetishism? Are lenses kissable if they get very high ratings?
Anyone lovingly telling his DA 18-55mm, "Oohhh, my precious..."?

**robbiec** · 03-22-2013, 09:20 AM

Hehehe, something along those lines with my 77

but not because of a rating, subjective or otherwise, purely because it just looks right.

I'm kinda sorry I asked now, did not realise people would get so defensive, serious, argumentative

Jean Poitiers · 03-22-2013, 09:29 AM

I have no idea and could care less ... J

**boriscleto** · 03-22-2013, 09:32 AM

I'll go with what I have listed at PPG...

• smc M 40-80mmF2.8-4 6.92
• smc M 80-200mmF4.5 NEW 8.55
• smc A 28mmF2.8 8.49
• smc A 50mmF1.4 9.15
• smc A 50mmF2 7.68
• smc A 135mmF2.8 8.94
• smc F 35-70mmF3.5-4.5 8.72
• smc F 35-135mmF3.5-4.5 8.33
• smc F 70-210mmF4-5.6 8.44
• smc FA 80-320mmF4.5-5.6 7.48
• smc FA 28-80mmF3.5-5.6 6.43
• smc FA 28-105mmF4-5.6 8.50
• smc FA 50mmF1.7 9.70
• smc 55mmF1.8 9.41
• Auto-Takumar 55mmF1.8 9.38
• Super-Takumar 35mmF2 8.00
• Super-Takumar 50mmF1.4 9.38
• smc Takumar 35mmF3.5 8.94
• smc Takumar 55mmF1.8 9.38
• smc Takumar 135mmF3.5 8.36
• smc M 50mmF1.7 9.32
• smc DA L 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 AL 7.61
• smc DA 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 AL WR 7.59
• smc DA L 55-300mm F4-5.8 ED 8.69
• Sigma A 50mm F2.8 Macro, Sears 55mm F1.4, Helios 44M 58MM F2, Auto Sears MC 50mm F1.7, Sigma 28mm F2.8 Mini-Wide (8.71, 9.25, 9.23, 8.50, 8.40)

Average = 8.53

Most of the ratings are of course total BS. For example, the Super Takumar 50/1.4 8-element. There are 13 reviews 12 of which rate it a 9 or 10. 1 reviewer gave it a 5. That brings the average below that of the 7 element version...

**robbiec** · 03-22-2013, 09:33 AM

Originally posted by Jean Poitiers

I have no idea and could care less ... J

Why post in the thread then?

Jean Poitiers · 03-22-2013, 09:43 AM

Originally posted by robbiec

Why post in the thread then?

No reason ... other than to mention that some could care less comparing their ratings to others ...

Mareket · 03-22-2013, 10:09 AM

Originally posted by Jean Poitiers

No reason ... other than to mention that some could care less comparing their ratings to others ...

Oh come on, it's a bit of fun. You don't think anyone actually cares about the ratings of their lenses do you?

It's like a review that doesn't post any photos, purely for the fun of writing about your equipment. Not really very useful, but there's nothing wrong with it.

Jean Poitiers · 03-22-2013, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by Mareket

Oh come on, it's a bit of fun. You don't think anyone actually cares about the ratings of their lenses do you?

It's like a review that doesn't post any photos, purely for the fun of writing about your equipment. Not really very useful, but there's nothing wrong with it.

I agree that it's all in good fun, and yes, I do think that some people care about the ratings of their lenses ... and in particular the lenses that they are planning to buy in the future.

I never said that there was anything wrong here ... but I think that the ratings are kind of silly for one's bag and are highly subjective ... enough said.

Excuse me if I hurt anyone's feelings ... J

03-22-2013, 09:32 AM	#26
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	I'll go with what I have listed at PPG... • smc M 40-80mmF2.8-4 6.92 • smc M 80-200mmF4.5 NEW 8.55 • smc A 28mmF2.8 8.49 • smc A 50mmF1.4 9.15 • smc A 50mmF2 7.68 • smc A 135mmF2.8 8.94 • smc F 35-70mmF3.5-4.5 8.72 • smc F 35-135mmF3.5-4.5 8.33 • smc F 70-210mmF4-5.6 8.44 • smc FA 80-320mmF4.5-5.6 7.48 • smc FA 28-80mmF3.5-5.6 6.43 • smc FA 28-105mmF4-5.6 8.50 • smc FA 50mmF1.7 9.70 • smc 55mmF1.8 9.41 • Auto-Takumar 55mmF1.8 9.38 • Super-Takumar 35mmF2 8.00 • Super-Takumar 50mmF1.4 9.38 • smc Takumar 35mmF3.5 8.94 • smc Takumar 55mmF1.8 9.38 • smc Takumar 135mmF3.5 8.36 • smc M 50mmF1.7 9.32 • smc DA L 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 AL 7.61 • smc DA 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 AL WR 7.59 • smc DA L 55-300mm F4-5.8 ED 8.69 • Sigma A 50mm F2.8 Macro, Sears 55mm F1.4, Helios 44M 58MM F2, Auto Sears MC 50mm F1.7, Sigma 28mm F2.8 Mini-Wide (8.71, 9.25, 9.23, 8.50, 8.40) Average = 8.53 Most of the ratings are of course total BS. For example, the Super Takumar 50/1.4 8-element. There are 13 reviews 12 of which rate it a 9 or 10. 1 reviewer gave it a 5. That brings the average below that of the 7 element version... Last edited by boriscleto; 03-22-2013 at 09:39 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Whats considered the best value super wide angle lens ? Less than 17mm	photoleet	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	24	02-01-2012 10:19 AM
Night Of The Living Credit Rating Agencies II....	Ratmagiclady	General Talk	8	08-18-2011 02:23 AM
How accurate do you think the average ratings in the Lens Reviews are?	OutOfFocus	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	47	08-06-2011 07:18 PM
Whats your favorite camera/lens combo?	yeatzee	Photographic Technique	31	09-29-2010 12:36 PM
whats in the bag	JrPentax	Photographic Technique	40	02-21-2008 03:43 PM

03-22-2013, 07:58 AM	#16
calculator01 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Edmonton, Alberta Photos: Albums Posts: 817	My lenses are all 10's ... At least that's how some people rate them.

03-22-2013, 08:07 AM	#17
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,887	aside from the fact than many of my ~55 lenses are either unrated, or so limited in reviews to have a statistically sound rating, I fail to see the point of this exercise at any rate. the rating system used has been so badly battered for every single lens that has ever been reviewed, based upon so many different points of view that one would question the real value and use of making an average of a completely unreliable rating system in the first place. besides, at the end of the day it is the photographs we take that matter, not the perceived quality or value of what is in your gadget bag. I am sure I can take out enough lenses that are so close to 10's in the forum that I can beat anyone on a limited kit rating, but what does it really mean? To me,. nothing at all

03-22-2013, 08:12 AM	#18
robbiec Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Cork Photos: Albums Posts: 1,882 Original Poster	Originally posted by normhead I'm not sure what value this is. I use my old Sigma 70-300 Macro for some shots, and it's rated at 7.92, my DA@ 60-250 is rated at 9.62, but in some circumstances the Sigma significantly out performs it. And I wouldn't sell the Sigma based on it's rating. I don't even care what it's rating is, what others may think of it is of little importance. Used for what it's good at, I don't know of a lens that's better. But I guess as something to kill some time with, it's an interesting question. I would broadly agree with most of our ratings overall, perhaps some are a point or 2 higher than I would personally rate them, some of the Takumars for example. More granularity would be useful, i.e. being able to give a 9.5 instead of a 10 as if you browse though the comments a few have highlighted that. Also some lens have achieved some sort of cult status and are not allowed to be rated lower than reality

03-22-2013, 08:19 AM	#19
robbiec Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Cork Photos: Albums Posts: 1,882 Original Poster	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge aside from the fact than many of my ~55 lenses are either unrated, or so limited in reviews to have a statistically sound rating, I fail to see the point of this exercise at any rate. the rating system used has been so badly battered for every single lens that has ever been reviewed, based upon so many different points of view that one would question the real value and use of making an average of a completely unreliable rating system in the first place. besides, at the end of the day it is the photographs we take that matter, not the perceived quality or value of what is in your gadget bag. I am sure I can take out enough lenses that are so close to 10's in the forum that I can beat anyone on a limited kit rating, but what does it really mean? To me,. nothing at all Lowell, you are taking this way way too seriously. Its an observation, nothing more. The only thing that this thread has highlighted is that I have a bag of lenses that I personally like and use and that the majority of the forum agree. And that I value the reviews from our fellow forum users. Also, if you have too many 55s that are unrated, how come when you can rate them and share your experience with us?

03-22-2013, 08:49 AM - 1 Like	#20
bassek Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 706	Well yes, this is a cheeky thing after all, not to be taken seriously. Besides, a LBA shopping spree will increase the Vsc when buying big amounts of lenses. So I expect someonewith a big lens collection to reach double digit Vsc figures. Someone like RioRico might still be counting and replying next week earliest. Seb

03-22-2013, 08:52 AM	#21
Franky2step Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Niagara Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 793	Personally I think Pentaxians rate their lenses extremely optimistically. If you haven't used other brands top of the line lenses you prpbably cannot know how good or not good they really are. I say this having used Zeiss, Voigtlander, Canon L, Nikon's top glass, and Pentax FA Ltds. Let the hate begin....lol....serious though

03-22-2013, 08:57 AM	#22
magkelly Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,901	If a lens isn't excellent it's generally not in my bag and really I don't care so much for how they're rated. I've used lenses that were rated very high that IMHO sucked and I've used lenses that were rated far less that I loved. Most rating systems all they care about is how sharp a lens is or occasionally the kind of bokeh it has. To me what exactly constitutes a "good" lens it is so much more than that. In the end it's not about what the lenses are supposedly worth or what quality number has been assigned to them. It's about what I can do with them. When you get right down to it? The "best" rated lenses in my bag aren't actually always the ones that I think are best. I go with what works, with the lens that produces the type of images I'd like to see just then, with my actual experience of how my particular lenses work, not with ratings. That's it. Last edited by magkelly; 03-22-2013 at 09:04 AM.

03-22-2013, 09:16 AM	#23
causey Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Arlington, VA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,757	Is this some kind of fetishism? Are lenses kissable if they get very high ratings? Anyone lovingly telling his DA 18-55mm, "Oohhh, my precious..."?

03-22-2013, 09:20 AM	#24
robbiec Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Cork Photos: Albums Posts: 1,882 Original Poster	Hehehe, something along those lines with my 77 but not because of a rating, subjective or otherwise, purely because it just looks right. I'm kinda sorry I asked now, did not realise people would get so defensive, serious, argumentative

03-22-2013, 09:29 AM	#25
Jean Poitiers Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Lost in translation ... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 18,076	I have no idea and could care less ... J

03-22-2013, 09:33 AM	#27
robbiec Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Cork Photos: Albums Posts: 1,882 Original Poster	Originally posted by Jean Poitiers I have no idea and could care less ... J Why post in the thread then?

03-22-2013, 09:43 AM	#28
Jean Poitiers Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Lost in translation ... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 18,076	Originally posted by robbiec Why post in the thread then? No reason ... other than to mention that some could care less comparing their ratings to others ...

03-22-2013, 10:09 AM	#29
Mareket Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Chester Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 719	Originally posted by Jean Poitiers No reason ... other than to mention that some could care less comparing their ratings to others ... Oh come on, it's a bit of fun. You don't think anyone actually cares about the ratings of their lenses do you? It's like a review that doesn't post any photos, purely for the fun of writing about your equipment. Not really very useful, but there's nothing wrong with it.

03-22-2013, 10:28 AM	#30
Jean Poitiers Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Lost in translation ... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 18,076	Originally posted by Mareket Oh come on, it's a bit of fun. You don't think anyone actually cares about the ratings of their lenses do you? It's like a review that doesn't post any photos, purely for the fun of writing about your equipment. Not really very useful, but there's nothing wrong with it. I agree that it's all in good fun, and yes, I do think that some people care about the ratings of their lenses ... and in particular the lenses that they are planning to buy in the future. I never said that there was anything wrong here ... but I think that the ratings are kind of silly for one's bag and are highly subjective ... enough said. Excuse me if I hurt anyone's feelings ... J