Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 25 Aug 2015 (Tuesday) 16:30
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

What is the point of the camera and lens sample sections?

 
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,023 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2185
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Aug 26, 2015 01:16 |  #16

it shows the capability of the lens/camera...if you want technical shots to judge sharpness, and all other aspects of the lens, there are sites dedicated to that that already do a much better job than a group of different people posting different shots...


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
GeoKras1989
Goldmember
Avatar
4,038 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 261
Joined Jun 2014
     
Aug 26, 2015 02:17 |  #17
bannedPermanent ban

tdlavigne wrote in post #17683104 (external link)
I think of it more like "This is what you can get IF you do the necessary post-work", but even with the images that aren't retouched...most of those are jpgs straight out of camera. The camera applies all sorts of corrections and adjustments from sharpening, contrast, CA corrections, color balance, etc (depending on which profile) all of which greatly affect the way an image looks.

Ideally everyone would post raw samples but that can get tricky for a number of reasons. Instead I just try to look at as many different examples as possible when starting to research gear, and look for patterns that would suggest good/bad performance.

You miss the fact that it is completely impossible to post a raw photo. Every piece of software that can turn raw data into something you would call a photograph INTERPRETS that raw data and makes judgements/decisions about how to render it. There is no such thing as a raw photograph. Your idea to post raw samples makes as much sense as posting film shots BEFORE developing the film. It can't be done. As stated, every photo you've ever seen has been processed.

Aswald wrote in post #17683130 (external link)
Actually, OP has a point. Perhaps for Camera and Lens section, Admin can suggest that the samples loaded should not be retouched.

Otherwise, the only other way is to ask the poster for a untouched file.

The only way to accomplish that is to post the actual raw file in some sort of file-sharing site. What would be the point? You'd have to look through PROCESSED images in order to determine which files you wanted to download. After you download the raw file, the only way to see it is to PROCESS it into something resembling a photograph. Purpose defeated.

The only time I've ever actually done this was when I downloaded some raw files generated using a Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 UMC. I wanted to see for myself how LR handled the distortion and vignetting corrections. In the end, I was looking at... guess what... wait for it... here it comes... PROCESSED IMAGES!

Until someone figures out how to turn 0100100010001001111001​0100111100001001000100​010001000100010... into something your brain can understand as a photograph, you will always be looking at processed images.


WARNING: I often dispense advice in fields I know little about!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
silma
Senior Member
Avatar
489 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 49
Joined Jul 2012
Location: italy
     
Aug 26, 2015 05:02 |  #18

when I post in lens sample I try to stick to camera raw as much as possible: no heavy crops, no heavy PP (which is not a problem for me as I'm not so good at it).

I enjoy those threads a lot, they are a great collection of what you can do with a specific lens


my flickr (external link)

my dreamstime (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Aswald
Goldmember
1,162 posts
Likes: 106
Joined Oct 2013
Location: London, Paris, NY
     
Aug 26, 2015 07:32 |  #19

silma wrote in post #17683356 (external link)
when I post in lens sample I try to stick to camera raw as much as possible: no heavy crops, no heavy PP (which is not a problem for me as I'm not so good at it).

I enjoy those threads a lot, they are a great collection of what you can do with a specific lens

I think that's the way to go. I do that too in any lens or camera review.

In any kind of review/purchase considerations, most people go through a process of elimination of pros and cons. The simpler the posted sample is, the easier it is to come to a conclusion.

I guess, until the lens and camera sample section becomes strictly technical samples, we'd have to take every sample with it's notes posted by the OP.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike_311
Checking squirrels nuts
3,761 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 549
Joined Mar 2011
     
Aug 26, 2015 10:17 |  #20

its not like you can effectively post process a lenses ability to render a scene. the sample archive are actually a good representation of what you can expect from a lens, especially when it comes to out of focus elements and sharpness.


Canon 5d mkii | Canon 17-40/4L | Tamron 24-70/2.8 | Canon 85/1.8 | Canon 135/2L
www.michaelalestraphot​ography.com (external link)
Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | About me

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
[Hyuni]
Goldmember
Avatar
1,186 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Dec 2008
Location: CHiCAGO
     
Aug 26, 2015 10:50 |  #21

The point is to drool over new gear and convince yourself that all you need is that new lens or new body and you can get the same amazing results.

tbh, I haven't bought a new lens in over 2 years and that was the 14mm f2.8 Rokinon I got for $225. Other than that, it's been a very long time since I've bought a lens, only because I really feel like with what and how I shoot, my current lineup is exactly what I need.

I do frequent the flash and studio lighting almost every day to see everyone's work.


6D Rokinon 14 f/2.8 l EF 35 ƒ1.4L l EF 135 ƒ2.0L l EF 70-200 ƒ2.8L IS II l YN460 l 580EX II l Flick'd (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,744 posts
Gallery: 73 photos
Likes: 697
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Aug 26, 2015 19:52 |  #22

[Hyuni wrote:
='[Hyuni];17683677']Th​e point is to drool over new gear and convince yourself that all you need is that new lens or new body and you can get the same amazing results.


This. Just don't look at the cheap lens threads and realize that you can also take great shots with them too.

Personally I can see through the processing most of the time. But I do prefer when folks link to a full resolution version - e.g. on Flickr. Of course I understand why the pros are not going to do that. Some others I do wonder why they limit their Flickr photos to 1000 pixels - Hello, your shots are not that good.


Edward Jenner
5DIV, M6, GX1 II, Sig15mm FE, 16-35 F4,TS-E 17, TS-E 24, M11-22, M18-150 ,24-105, T45 1.8VC, 70-200 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8 vII, Sig 85 1.4, 100L, 135L, 400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
maxblack
I feel like I'm in danger
Avatar
2,008 posts
Likes: 289
Joined Sep 2008
Location: NYC Area
     
Aug 26, 2015 20:19 |  #23

dexter75 wrote in post #17683191 (external link)
Not saying ban retouching at all. Im saying, if you shoot portraits, thats great, put it in the portraits section along with what lens was used and leave the lens sample thread for straight off the camera samples. Thats the best way to get the best feel for the lens. Showing images that have been worked on in LTR or PS for an hour and sharpened to hell and back don't give a true representation of a lens. I can make a shot done with the $75 Canon 50 f/1.8 look like it was shot with the $1500 50 f/1.2L with about 10 minutes of post process work. Sharpen it up, add bokeh, play with the saturation and contrast...people would think its some amazing lens that rivals L glass. I just feels it misrepresents the lenses.

See bold type in quote above:
Can you really do this, I'd like to see it. I would really, could've saved me a lot of money. :lol:

I go to the Lens Samples and see what can be done with a particular lens.
If a lot of people are getting great results with a particular lens or lens/camera combo,
Then I feel pretty comfortable I will too.
You are looking for truth in how a lens functions SOOC and "I do" understand that
but not too many people are going to want to post an inferior looking image
for the world to see when they can improve the living heck out of it with processing.
That's just me though. ;-)a



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,135 posts
Gallery: 1603 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10131
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Aug 26, 2015 21:21 |  #24

I thought it was to look at art, and simply have an idea of the tools used.

Doesn't mean the results will be the same for another artist.

That's of course only if you dig through for the photographs and avoid the snaps of brick walls and random crap in someone's house when they initially buy something...

;)

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
itsallart
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,677 posts
Gallery: 737 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 7855
Joined Jan 2015
Location: Near Dallas
     
Aug 26, 2015 21:28 |  #25

I think that you may have forgotten that what you see on your LCD screen is already processed by the camera and rendered as JPEG with no human intervention. How is that supposed to be a good sample of what the camera is capable of doing?


Renata
Seeing lights and shadows is an art :)
Renata Sharman (external link)Tanami Muse (external link)
500px (external link)
Etsy Store (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dexter75
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
329 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Aug 2015
     
Aug 27, 2015 01:07 |  #26

maxblack wrote in post #17684267 (external link)
See bold type in quote above:
Can you really do this, I'd like to see it. I would really, could've saved me a lot of money. :lol:

I go to the Lens Samples and see what can be done with a particular lens.
If a lot of people are getting great results with a particular lens or lens/camera combo,
Then I feel pretty comfortable I will too.
You are looking for truth in how a lens functions SOOC and "I do" understand that
but not too many people are going to want to post an inferior looking image
for the world to see when they can improve the living heck out of it with processing.
That's just me though. ;-)a

I don't have to thankfully. Go look thru the 50 f/1.8 sample thread and you will see plenty of pro shots that look every bit as good (some even much better) than you will see in the 50 f/1.2L thread. I own the f/1.8 and I don't think its too far off the f/1.2, especially when you know how to add blur, sharpen correctly and make the colors pop. You can do a ton in Photoshop.


Canon EOS 6D EOS 5D | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 EF 85mm f/1.8 USM EF 70-200mm f/4L USM EF 135mm f/2L USM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Reservoir ­ Dog
A Band Apart
Avatar
3,279 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 435
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Out of the pack
     
Aug 27, 2015 01:31 |  #27

dexter75 wrote in post #17683191 (external link)
Not saying ban retouching at all. Im saying, if you shoot portraits, thats great, put it in the portraits section along with what lens was used and leave the lens sample thread for straight off the camera samples. Thats the best way to get the best feel for the lens. Showing images that have been worked on in LR or PS for an hour and sharpened to hell and back don't give a true representation of a lens. I can make a shot done with the $75 Canon 50 f/1.8 look like it was shot with the $1500 50 f/1.2L with about 10 minutes of post process work. Sharpen it up, add bokeh, play with the saturation and contrast...people would think its some amazing lens that rivals L glass. I just feels it misrepresents the lenses.

Agree !
And soon there will be presets style about lenses ... like there is presets about everything (B&W, cross-process, etc ...), so soon in just one click and your picture will look like it was taken by a 200mm f/1.8 :-)


150 Free online photos editing application (external link) / 100 Free Desktop Photo Editor Software (external link) / Free Photography eBooks (external link) / My photography blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nathan
So boring
Avatar
7,732 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 295
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Boston
     
Aug 27, 2015 08:42 |  #28

dexter75 wrote in post #17684524 (external link)
You can do a ton in Photoshop.

Not a lot of us want to spend that much time behind a computer. We'd rather be taking photos and getting much of what we want in-camera.

Can't speak for others, but I'm not adding "blur" to my photos in post. With respect to the 50/1.8 or 50/1.4, I didn't like the pentagonal or hexagonal bokeh. I was never going to step into Photoshop to change that bokeh. Interesting now that the new STM has a 7-blade circular aperture, though.


Taking photos with a fancy camera does not make me a photographer.
www.nathantpham.com (external link) | Boston POTN Flickr (external link) |
5D3 x2 | 16-35L II | 35 L | 50L | 85L II | 135L | 580 EX II x2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike_311
Checking squirrels nuts
3,761 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 549
Joined Mar 2011
Post edited over 3 years ago by mike_311.
     
Aug 27, 2015 09:02 |  #29

dexter75 wrote in post #17684524 (external link)
I don't have to thankfully. Go look thru the 50 f/1.8 sample thread and you will see plenty of pro shots that look every bit as good (some even much better) than you will see in the 50 f/1.2L thread. I own the f/1.8 and I don't think its too far off the f/1.2, especially when you know how to add blur, sharpen correctly and make the colors pop. You can do a ton in Photoshop.

wow. what an ignorant statement.

you know what you cant do with a 1.8 that you can do with a 1.2? shoot at 1.2, or 1.4 for that matter. also good luck mimicking shallow DOF that has foreground and background bokeh. you can't.

in addition if you never shot with the 1.2, how the hell do you know how to process the image to make it look like it came from the 1.2?


Canon 5d mkii | Canon 17-40/4L | Tamron 24-70/2.8 | Canon 85/1.8 | Canon 135/2L
www.michaelalestraphot​ography.com (external link)
Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | About me

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
panicatnabisco
Senior Member
Avatar
968 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 306
Joined Apr 2012
Location: san francisco, CA
     
Aug 27, 2015 11:38 |  #30

dexter75 wrote in post #17684524 (external link)
I don't have to thankfully. Go look thru the 50 f/1.8 sample thread and you will see plenty of pro shots that look every bit as good (some even much better) than you will see in the 50 f/1.2L thread. I own the f/1.8 and I don't think its too far off the f/1.2, especially when you know how to add blur, sharpen correctly and make the colors pop. You can do a ton in Photoshop.

When you're editing hundreds of wedding photos, Photoshop is the last thing I want to think about

Also, 1.8 isnt too far off the 1.2? Have you even used a 50/1.2?


Canon 1DX | 6D | 16-35/2.8II | 24-70/2.8II | 50/1.8 | 70-200/2.8 IS II | 85/1.4 | 100/2.8 IS macro | 200mm f/2 | 400/2.8 IS II | 2xIII
Leica M8.2 | Noctilux 50 f/1 | Elmarit 90/2.8
afimages.net (external link) | Facebook (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

8,965 views & 30 likes for this thread
What is the point of the camera and lens sample sections?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is championlover1
668 guests, 224 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.