A lens challenge

**UncleVanya** · 04-16-2015, 10:53 AM

Originally posted by Dewman

Also, I might add, I use as my main PP software, Olympus Viewer II. I DO NOT shoot RAW and WILL NOT get into a discussion of how much better of I'd be if I were to do so. I'm very content to plod along shooting JPeg and using my tried and true, cheap little software program that came with a little P&S camera of a couple of years ago. If you haven't tried it, you might want to do so before you discount it as not worth the time of day. It's a free download on the Internet. You might be very pleasantly surprised. You don't have to have a $600 program to get some pretty darn good PP results.

I too shoot mainly in JPG. I also process exclusively on my Chromebook at the moment. It has been a challenge at times but mostly quite reasonable. I had fun looking at these.

BTW - is the EXIF data on Focal length representative of what you shot this at or were these all shot near the same Focal Length and the EXIF data used to remember which lens was which?

ChristianRock · 04-16-2015, 12:05 PM

Originally posted by 08amczb

Nice challenge

I say:
28-200
F35-70
50 macro
50 1.8

This was exactly my guess as well. I went by DOF...

**Lowell Goudge** · 04-16-2015, 12:12 PM

It was an unfair challenge because the OP varried the aperture between shots, and did not make use of the maximum aperture for effect, but interestingly, it showed that for zzooms the DOF is NOT only aperture dependemt. as you can see the last photo was shot at F11 acording to the EXIF but has much less FOD than the other lenses.

**UncleVanya** · 04-16-2015, 12:16 PM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

It was an unfair challenge because the OP varried the aperture between shots, and did not make use of the maximum aperture for effect, but interestingly, it showed that for zzooms the DOF is NOT only aperture dependemt. as you can see the last photo was shot at F11 acording to the EXIF but has much less FOD than the other lenses.

It also shows that last shot was at 200mm which would account for the reduced depth of field.

Dewman · 04-16-2015, 12:25 PM

Well, I must admit, I kinda' screwed up when I inadvertently failed to reset the aperture to f:11 on one shot. My bad. Next time, I'll do better.... but you'ze guys did good on guessing which was which. But, you've got to admit, there wasn't a whole lot of difference between them..... right? And yes, the EXIF data is correct as far as the focal length. Although the Tamron WAS shot at 200mm, it was in "close focus" mode..... so.... take that into account.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Leica M Monochrom...a Pentax Challenge?	jeverettfine	General Photography	13	03-03-2015 11:56 AM
Black & White A Challenge	troika	Post Your Photos!	2	11-11-2014 06:32 AM
15 bladed lens challenge :) Can you identify this lens and mount? (Not me!)	Enigmaticca	Photographic Industry and Professionals	7	01-08-2012 10:57 AM
Post-Processing PP Challenge #27-A rock and a hard place...	ozlizard	Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories	19	06-25-2010 01:30 AM
Post-Processing PP Challenge #23	JeffJS	Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories	33	05-07-2010 09:01 PM

04-16-2015, 10:53 AM	#16
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,401	Originally posted by Dewman Also, I might add, I use as my main PP software, Olympus Viewer II. I DO NOT shoot RAW and WILL NOT get into a discussion of how much better of I'd be if I were to do so. I'm very content to plod along shooting JPeg and using my tried and true, cheap little software program that came with a little P&S camera of a couple of years ago. If you haven't tried it, you might want to do so before you discount it as not worth the time of day. It's a free download on the Internet. You might be very pleasantly surprised. You don't have to have a $600 program to get some pretty darn good PP results. I too shoot mainly in JPG. I also process exclusively on my Chromebook at the moment. It has been a challenge at times but mostly quite reasonable. I had fun looking at these. BTW - is the EXIF data on Focal length representative of what you shot this at or were these all shot near the same Focal Length and the EXIF data used to remember which lens was which?

04-16-2015, 12:05 PM	#17
ChristianRock Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: People's Republic of America Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,910	Originally posted by 08amczb Nice challenge I say: 28-200 F35-70 50 macro 50 1.8 This was exactly my guess as well. I went by DOF...

04-16-2015, 12:12 PM	#18
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,887	It was an unfair challenge because the OP varried the aperture between shots, and did not make use of the maximum aperture for effect, but interestingly, it showed that for zzooms the DOF is NOT only aperture dependemt. as you can see the last photo was shot at F11 acording to the EXIF but has much less FOD than the other lenses.

04-16-2015, 12:16 PM	#19
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,401	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge It was an unfair challenge because the OP varried the aperture between shots, and did not make use of the maximum aperture for effect, but interestingly, it showed that for zzooms the DOF is NOT only aperture dependemt. as you can see the last photo was shot at F11 acording to the EXIF but has much less FOD than the other lenses. It also shows that last shot was at 200mm which would account for the reduced depth of field.

04-16-2015, 12:25 PM	#20
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492 Original Poster	Well, I must admit, I kinda' screwed up when I inadvertently failed to reset the aperture to f:11 on one shot. My bad. Next time, I'll do better.... but you'ze guys did good on guessing which was which. But, you've got to admit, there wasn't a whole lot of difference between them..... right? And yes, the EXIF data is correct as far as the focal length. Although the Tamron WAS shot at 200mm, it was in "close focus" mode..... so.... take that into account.