Thematic WR-pride or please share your WR-masterpieces!!!

cali92rs · 10-22-2015, 01:38 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by alexeyga

-I use Pentax gear my-self, one of the reasons - the WR (I can show you some shots done standing chest-deep in the water with WR and non-WR lenses), so no - I'm not a troll from CaNikon land if you were meaning to treat me as such...

Sooooo, lets see it!!! Don't be shy!!!

I see how this is going...folks are going to post shots where WR was required, and you are going to point out why they aren't masterpieces.

Why not post some of your personal examples and show us what we need to strive for?

narual · 10-22-2015, 01:39 PM

Water droplets. Or maybe ice, by that point. (not sure if a hood would have helped, but I bought the 16-50 used and it didn't come with one).
And it's pouring. Not poring.

Imp · 10-22-2015, 01:42 PM

Originally posted by alexeyga

Good point, but I still want to see some poring rain masterpieces that justify the whole "we're so much better because we have WR" - attitude.

First, find a master. Likely, he won't be on a camera forum.

**mattb123** · 10-22-2015, 01:43 PM - **1 Like**

This one was published in a cycling magazine (but not as the cover). It was pouring rain and others put their cameras away.

Less extreme weather here but this will be in the December issue of HGTV Magazine. (also not on the cover)
I could have done this without WR but you don't always know that ahead of time so when I'm shooting from skis I almost always use a WR equipped lens.

For the record I don't think I'm better for having WR but sometimes it either helps or gives me the confidence to get a better shot than I might without it.
Other brands have it too but I like that ours has it in some relatively affordable yet high quality gear.

Last edited by mattb123; 10-22-2015 at 01:48 PM.

narual · 10-22-2015, 01:45 PM

that is hilarious, Matt. Go, Santa, go!

And OP, this post reminds me far too much of assorted trolling posts on software forums. You may not be a canikon troll, but this still smacks of trolling.

alexeyga · 10-22-2015, 01:49 PM

Originally posted by cali92rs

I see how this is going...folks are going to post shots where WR was required, and you are going to point out why they aren't masterpieces.

Why not post some of your personal examples and show us what we need to strive for?

I openly admit that I suck balls at "under-the-poring-rain" - photography and I'm unable to pull masterpieces when the sky is dark, light sucks and water droplets make everything blurry. Even WR doesn't help...

But I'm wondering if I haven't made a mistake when I bought a K3? Should've gone with the K3II instead, it has the Pixel Shift in addition to WR, perhaps it's the answer!!!!

**csa** · 10-22-2015, 02:16 PM

Frankly, I don't know what you're trying to get at; there's been some very nice examples of WR posted, that you've ignored. Now you're talking about your purchase of a K3 was a mistake, instead of a K3II. How does this figure in to your topic as originally posted?

cali92rs · 10-22-2015, 02:20 PM - **2 Likes**

He is trolling...
He is saying that WR is not a big deal because good pictures cannot be taken when it is wet, and that we should not make a big deal out of it Pentax's WR.

When someone says "i am not a troll", you can bet he is one. Just like when athletes leave their team and say, "it isn't about the money", well, we know it really was ALL 'bout the money.

**mattb123** · 10-22-2015, 02:52 PM

Here's another example. I like WR for lightning photos too. I can put the camera in interval mode (great feature!) and just let it run out on my porch while I stay dry inside. This is a covered porch but when it storms the rain blows in from the sides.

HudsonShooter · 10-22-2015, 03:22 PM

https://twitter.com/3garcons/status/642933818354176000 this was a very wet day rained all day, but the lens did not pick up rain very well.

alexeyga · 10-22-2015, 05:43 PM

Matt, you're a in minority of people around here whose photographs (most) are worthy of being shown, respect!

But I'm still craving to see a shot that would justify all these thousands (if not millions) of WR-praising posts. Anybody? Hundreds and thousands of cool shots of your WR-protected gear being exposed to all sorts of elements, but not a single truly-amazing photograph made with that same gear? Doesn't it sound kinda silly?

These whom it pleases - can consider this whole topic being nothing but a big, fat attempt in trolling.

---------- Post added 10-22-2015 at 08:47 PM ----------

Originally posted by csa

Now you're talking about your purchase of a K3 was a mistake, instead of a K3II. How does this figure in to your topic as originally posted?

Usually this is called "humor"... perhaps, I was addressing the wrong public, people tend to take anything - supposedly - anti-Pentax - in a very personal manner. I should try the same joke on a CaNikon forum - they'll surely get it...

BrianR · 10-22-2015, 07:32 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by alexeyga

Main criteria:
-It has to be something that you wouldn't have been able to shoot if it wasn't for the WR
-The shot must be public-exposure-on-a-large-billboard worthy, which implies that your shot must have some artistic (Photographic with capital "P") quality to it
*these, obviously, do not apply to the above-shown example

...

Nope, I've snatched it from the Sport's photography thread!!!

To make a point - that is...

It's utterly uncool to take someone else's photo (and a Pentax Forum's member no less), post it to a new thread, give them no credit (and not even mention it wasn't yours until pressed), and then top it off with a declaration on how it doesn't meet whatever arbitrary standard for artistic awesomeness you've decided to set.

Congratulations! You've managed to create the jerkiest thread I've seen here in months!

**Scorpio71GR** · 10-22-2015, 07:45 PM - **2 Likes**

Thsee were shot with the entire city and county fire departments responding to a major fire. The spray from the fire trucks was everywhere. Other photographers were there, including one from the newspaper, however I was the only one willing to get closer to the fire and the only one with a Pentax.

There were two Cannon guys standing way behind me when I took this one. They told me I better be careful getting so close. I told them it was ok I have a Pentax.

**csa** · 10-22-2015, 08:59 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by alexeyga

Nope, I've snatched it from the Sport's photography thread!!!

To make a point - that is...

I'm not sure about the rules on this site; but other sites I belong to, do not allow someone posting a photo belonging to another member without their permission, and then to literally trash the photo that didn't belong to you.

At the very least, this was very rude to another fellow member here.

**csa** · 10-22-2015, 09:07 PM

Michael, those are spectacular images! Thanks for sharing them with us!

10-22-2015, 07:32 PM - 2 Likes	#27
BrianR Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,332	Originally posted by alexeyga Main criteria: -It has to be something that you wouldn't have been able to shoot if it wasn't for the WR -The shot must be public-exposure-on-a-large-billboard worthy, which implies that your shot must have some artistic (Photographic with capital "P") quality to it these, obviously, do not apply to the above-shown example ... Nope, I've snatched it from the Sport's photography thread!!! To make a point - that is... It's utterly uncool to take someone else's photo (and a Pentax Forum's member no less), post it to a new thread, give them no credit (and not even mention it wasn't yours until pressed), and then top it off with a declaration on how it doesn't meet whatever arbitrary standard for artistic awesomeness you've decided to set. Congratulations! You've managed to create the jerkiest thread I've seen here in months! Last edited by BrianR; 10-23-2015 at 05:13 AM.*

10-22-2015, 08:59 PM - 2 Likes	#29
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133	Originally posted by alexeyga Nope, I've snatched it from the Sport's photography thread!!! To make a point - that is... I'm not sure about the rules on this site; but other sites I belong to, do not allow someone posting a photo belonging to another member without their permission, and then to literally trash the photo that didn't belong to you. At the very least, this was very rude to another fellow member here. Last edited by csa; 10-23-2015 at 07:26 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Please create a review! 16-85 WR vs 20-40 WR	Blacknight659	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	12-22-2014 06:45 AM
D-FA 100mm WR or non-WR	misomosi	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	20	11-29-2014 09:45 PM
Advice please - K3 or D-FA 100 WR?	jamarley	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	09-17-2014 08:46 AM
For Sale - Sold: WR set DA 18-55 WR and DA 50-200 WR	missile	Sold Items	6	11-23-2013 05:21 PM

10-22-2015, 01:38 PM - 2 Likes	#16
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by alexeyga -I use Pentax gear my-self, one of the reasons - the WR (I can show you some shots done standing chest-deep in the water with WR and non-WR lenses), so no - I'm not a troll from CaNikon land if you were meaning to treat me as such... Sooooo, lets see it!!! Don't be shy!!! I see how this is going...folks are going to post shots where WR was required, and you are going to point out why they aren't masterpieces. Why not post some of your personal examples and show us what we need to strive for?

10-22-2015, 01:39 PM	#17
narual Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: South Bend (Notre Dame), Indiana Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,988	Water droplets. Or maybe ice, by that point. (not sure if a hood would have helped, but I bought the 16-50 used and it didn't come with one). And it's pouring. Not poring.

10-22-2015, 01:42 PM	#18
Imp Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Washington, DC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,749	Originally posted by alexeyga Good point, but I still want to see some poring rain masterpieces that justify the whole "we're so much better because we have WR" - attitude. First, find a master. Likely, he won't be on a camera forum.

10-22-2015, 01:43 PM - 1 Like	#19
mattb123 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado High Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,873	This one was published in a cycling magazine (but not as the cover). It was pouring rain and others put their cameras away. Less extreme weather here but this will be in the December issue of HGTV Magazine. (also not on the cover) I could have done this without WR but you don't always know that ahead of time so when I'm shooting from skis I almost always use a WR equipped lens. For the record I don't think I'm better for having WR but sometimes it either helps or gives me the confidence to get a better shot than I might without it. Other brands have it too but I like that ours has it in some relatively affordable yet high quality gear. Last edited by mattb123; 10-22-2015 at 01:48 PM.

10-22-2015, 01:45 PM	#20
narual Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: South Bend (Notre Dame), Indiana Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,988	that is hilarious, Matt. Go, Santa, go! And OP, this post reminds me far too much of assorted trolling posts on software forums. You may not be a canikon troll, but this still smacks of trolling.

10-22-2015, 01:49 PM	#21
alexeyga Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Montreal, Canada Posts: 838 Original Poster	Originally posted by cali92rs I see how this is going...folks are going to post shots where WR was required, and you are going to point out why they aren't masterpieces. Why not post some of your personal examples and show us what we need to strive for? I openly admit that I suck balls at "under-the-poring-rain" - photography and I'm unable to pull masterpieces when the sky is dark, light sucks and water droplets make everything blurry. Even WR doesn't help... But I'm wondering if I haven't made a mistake when I bought a K3? Should've gone with the K3II instead, it has the Pixel Shift in addition to WR, perhaps it's the answer!!!!

10-22-2015, 02:16 PM	#22
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133	Frankly, I don't know what you're trying to get at; there's been some very nice examples of WR posted, that you've ignored. Now you're talking about your purchase of a K3 was a mistake, instead of a K3II. How does this figure in to your topic as originally posted?

10-22-2015, 02:20 PM - 2 Likes	#23
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	He is trolling... He is saying that WR is not a big deal because good pictures cannot be taken when it is wet, and that we should not make a big deal out of it Pentax's WR. When someone says "i am not a troll", you can bet he is one. Just like when athletes leave their team and say, "it isn't about the money", well, we know it really was ALL 'bout the money.

10-22-2015, 02:52 PM	#24
mattb123 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado High Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,873	Here's another example. I like WR for lightning photos too. I can put the camera in interval mode (great feature!) and just let it run out on my porch while I stay dry inside. This is a covered porch but when it storms the rain blows in from the sides.

10-22-2015, 03:22 PM	#25
HudsonShooter Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 108	https://twitter.com/3garcons/status/642933818354176000 this was a very wet day rained all day, but the lens did not pick up rain very well.

10-22-2015, 05:43 PM	#26
alexeyga Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Montreal, Canada Posts: 838 Original Poster	Matt, you're a in minority of people around here whose photographs (most) are worthy of being shown, respect! But I'm still craving to see a shot that would justify all these thousands (if not millions) of WR-praising posts. Anybody? Hundreds and thousands of cool shots of your WR-protected gear being exposed to all sorts of elements, but not a single truly-amazing photograph made with that same gear? Doesn't it sound kinda silly? These whom it pleases - can consider this whole topic being nothing but a big, fat attempt in trolling. ---------- Post added 10-22-2015 at 08:47 PM ---------- Originally posted by csa Now you're talking about your purchase of a K3 was a mistake, instead of a K3II. How does this figure in to your topic as originally posted? Usually this is called "humor"... perhaps, I was addressing the wrong public, people tend to take anything - supposedly - anti-Pentax - in a very personal manner. I should try the same joke on a CaNikon forum - they'll surely get it...

10-22-2015, 07:45 PM - 2 Likes	#28
Scorpio71GR Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Michigan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,014	Thsee were shot with the entire city and county fire departments responding to a major fire. The spray from the fire trucks was everywhere. Other photographers were there, including one from the newspaper, however I was the only one willing to get closer to the fire and the only one with a Pentax. There were two Cannon guys standing way behind me when I took this one. They told me I better be careful getting so close. I told them it was ok I have a Pentax.

10-22-2015, 09:07 PM	#30
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133	Michael, those are spectacular images! Thanks for sharing them with us!