Photo's of my modest Lens Collection

The Ran wrote in post #11614461
I have to ask, why did you shoot at ISO 200

Sorry, just wanted to point that out.

Great shots! My monitor is decent, according to imaging resource, and I don't see any noise. I would've shot lower ISO just because it would give a cleaner image "according to the rules" but honestly these look awesome! Thanks for posting the setup.

JS

wow, those pics look great!!!! thanks for sharing your setup.

mdgrwl wrote in post #11617175
Alright bro, I was trying to be nice about it, but enough of your crappy on the thread...

Enough of your exposure leasons & telling me how my set up, camera settings and monitor are all junk.

Listen "bro", you obviously have a problem with noise that you didn't notice but I did so I was trying to help about it. If you want to continue bringing down your otherwise decent photos due to something that could easily be remedied then that's fine by me.

john stakes wrote in post #11617407
Sorry, just wanted to point that out.

Great shots! My monitor is decent, according to imaging resource, and I don't see any noise. I would've shot lower ISO just because it would give a cleaner image "according to the rules" but honestly these look awesome! Thanks for posting the setup.

JS

Oh dear, so it seems I did say 200. I swear I even went back and checked my post to make sure, I must've checked the wrong post. So, I admit I accidentally missed out a "0", however if OP's post had've been read it'd be obvious what I meant to put, and a bit of common sense would tell you that if I recommended that he shoot at ISO 500 then I didn't really think he was shooting at 200.

You're absolutely right about the circular polarizer, they aren't just for bluer skies! I do a lot of photographs of plastic toys and dolls and use of a polarizer is absolutely essential for controlling reflections/highlights​. It's amazing how one plastic item can go from shiny to matte with a spin of the polarizer. My 52mm CPL is my most used filter (for the 60mm and 50mm macros).

Calibrated monitor here. Shots look great, OP! Keep up the good work, bro.

Ran, quit while you're behind.

PicSniper wrote in post #11618667
Calibrated monitor here. Shots look great, OP! Keep up the good work, bro.

Ran, quit while you're behind.

I never the shots were bad, in fact I said they were decent, that doesn't mean they can't have flaws. Like most people I'm happy to receive criticism and advice, if he can't handle it then perhaps he should reconsider posting his shots on the forum in future, that way no one can say anything negative about them.

And if you're seriously saying that even with a properly calibrated monitor you can't see all that noise, then that monitor is an absolute due to your poor eye sight.

The new plastic on the Sigma looks really nice. I never was a fan of that crystallised one they used before.

First off, awesome pictures!

The Ran wrote in post #11618936
I never the shots were bad, in fact I said they were decent, that doesn't mean they can't have flaws. Like most people I'm happy to receive criticism and advice, if he can't handle it then perhaps he should reconsider posting his shots on the forum in future, that way no one can say anything negative about them.

And if you're seriously saying that even with a properly calibrated monitor you can't see all that noise, then that monitor is an absolute due to your poor eye sight.

+1 on that, you gotta be prepared for critisism if you show off pictures. Absolultely.
And i think that way to many people are taking the critisism as a bad thing and not a learning experience and to be helped out to get even better. I mean, how else is one to be helped out? Or maybe it's about one not being ready to get better at what he likes.


My monitor is crap, and i can say that i see all blacks too like the others. But an easy way to see the noise in that black background is with the help of a simple program like paint and the paint bucket that fills one color to be another.
I opened one of the pics and choosed the black to become white, and if it's no noise in the picture all the blacks would become white, but it won't even cover up much and there you can see the noise.. Just for the nitpickers that wanna see and get rid of the noise without a screen that can't see the flaws.

I have a feeling that photoshop has this kind of function too but as i'm not aware of it, i'm reffering to paint, lol.

mdgrwl wrote in post #11617175
Alright bro, I was trying to be nice about it, but enough of your crappy on the thread...

Enough of your exposure leasons & telling me how my set up, camera settings and monitor are all junk.

I see that you don't take criticisms well.

HyperYagami wrote in post #11619189
I see that you don't take criticisms well.

I didn't mind the question about using a higher ISO even though I was tripod mounted. Simple enough question, and I would wonder the same thing too.

But after my explaination, I didn't appreciate the dual paragraph response why I was still wrong for my choice. Then on top of that, pokes that my computer equipment "really isn't any good".

I enjoy C&C and ask for it all the time on this forum. Just don't deliver it like a d-bag. Seriously, Ran you come accross like your just having a bad week.

All and all though, I could care less because I already want to do the shoot over and know of other 'flaws' i want to work on (mainly the lighting), and the OOF portions near the rear of each lens.

EDIT: Ran, it also seems YOUR monitor is out of calibration. Your black levels must be too light. I just recalibrated mine using multipel grey scale patterns to correctly show differences between the brightest whites/darkest greys/blacks... same thing, no fuzz or waves in the black. Now if I hype down the contrast and take my black levels to zero, then you start seeing imperfections - but thats with a now out of calibration monitor. No wonder why everyone else, including me, thinks its fine and your the only one 'complaining'.

Nevertheless, I'm doing the shoot over for other reasons mentioned above. I hope you'll be happy with my results. Now I'm aming to please a screen name "Ran" on PONT>

The Ran wrote in post #11618936
I never the shots were bad, in fact I said they were decent, that doesn't mean they can't have flaws. Like most people I'm happy to receive criticism and advice, if he can't handle it then perhaps he should reconsider posting his shots on the forum in future, that way no one can say anything negative about them.

And if you're seriously saying that even with a properly calibrated monitor you can't see all that noise, then that monitor is an absolute due to your poor eye sight.

Perfect eyesight here, bud. You are entitled to see whatever it is that you see on your end without telling me what I should be seeing or how my vision or my monitor is flawed. Say what you need to say to the OP, but say it in a way that doesn't come off like it did. There is obviously something wrong with the delivery of your criticism if more than one person is telling you the same thing, don't you think?

Criticism #1: "OP, your monitor might be uncalibrated. If it is uncalibrated, you might want to look into a gizmo that calibrates it for you. Also, I don't know the quality of your monitor, but if it isn't a recent model, a newer one may help you view your photography in a whole new light."

Criticism #2: "It would seem your monitor really isn't any good." and "Listen "bro", you obviously have a problem with noise that you didn't notice but I did so I was trying to help about it."

Read them both and tell me that you don't see the difference. Work on your delivery there, fella. The world needs a little more "nice" in it.

PicSniper wrote in post #11619590
Perfect eyesight here, bud. You are entitled to see whatever it is that you see on your end without telling me what I should be seeing or how my vision or my monitor is flawed. Say what you need to say to the OP, but say it in a way that doesn't come off like it did. There is obviously something wrong with the delivery of your criticism if more than one person is telling you the same thing, don't you think?

Criticism #1: "OP, your monitor might be uncalibrated. If it is uncalibrated, you might want to look into a gizmo that calibrates it for you. Also, I don't know the quality of your monitor, but if it isn't a recent model, a newer one may help you view your photography in a whole new light."

Criticism #2: "It would seem your monitor really isn't any good." and "Listen "bro", you obviously have a problem with noise that you didn't notice but I did so I was trying to help about it."

Read them both and tell me that you don't see the difference. Work on your delivery there, fella. The world needs a little more "nice" in it.

Thanks. It is a recent model. I don't know the exact model, but its a 24 inch LG I got from Best Buy a year ago... specs are very good. Its not 'garbage' like poked at.

EDIT: and agree'd on the delivery. I enjoy C&C. Just not from miserable people who come off like they are.

To the OP, what was the intension of your posting? was it to get people to critique your photos? or was it to show your collection?

If the purpose was to get people to critique your images, there is a section called "critque corner" where you can get some.
If the purpose was to show your collection, then there is a thread to show off your gear as well.

I reread your original post and it sounds like to me that you wanted to show your gear..
With that in mind, like you said, I think that sigma 85mm is calling out to you.

mdgrwl wrote in post #11619347
I didn't mind the question about using a higher ISO even though I was tripod mounted. Simple enough question, and I would wonder the same thing too.

But after my explaination, I didn't appreciate the dual paragraph response why I was still wrong for my choice. Then on top of that, pokes that my computer equipment is junk.

I enjoy C&C and ask for it all the time on this forum. Just don't deliver it like a d-bag. Seriously, Ran you come accross like your just having a bad week.

All and all though, I could care less because I already want to do the shoot over and know of other 'flaws' i want to work on (mainly the lighting), and the OOF portions near the rear of each lens.

EDIT: Ran, it also seems YOUR monitor is out of calibration. Your black levels must be too light. I just recalibrated mine using multipel grey scale patterns to correctly show differences between the brightest whites/darkest greys/blacks... same thing, no fuzz. Now if I hype down the contrast and take my black levels to zero, then you start seeing imperfections - but thats with a now out of calibration monitor. No wonder why everyone else, including me, thinks its fine and your the only one 'complaining'.

Nevertheless, I'm doing the shoot over for other reasons mentioned above. I hope you'll be happy with my results. Now I'm aming to please a screen name "Ran" on PONT>

I wasn't saying you were wrong, I was giving you some advice. To be honest I couldn't really give a **** what you do, I was just offering some advice, if you don't want to accept it then that's your choice.

My main monitor is reasonably well calibrated, my netbook isn't at all, yet they both show the noise. Maybe the real reason I'm the only one "complaining" is because far too many people are too nice for their own good. Have you ever been on Flickr? Have you ever noticed how even the lousiest photos ever can get hundreds of positives comments and favourites?

Being a Brit I also have to correct you on a bit of grammar, it's "I couldn't care less", for some reason Americans say the exact opposite and think it has the same meaning.

By the way you can just call me Ran if you want (remember, you don't have to if you don't want to).

PicSniper wrote in post #11619590
Perfect eyesight here, bud. You are entitled to see whatever it is that you see on your end without telling me what I should be seeing or how my vision or my monitor is flawed. Say what you need to say to the OP, but say it in a way that doesn't come off like it did. There is obviously something wrong with the delivery of your criticism if more than one person is telling you the same thing, don't you think?

Criticism #1: "OP, your monitor might be uncalibrated. If it is uncalibrated, you might want to look into a gizmo that calibrates it for you. Also, I don't know the quality of your monitor, but if it isn't a recent model, a newer one may help you view your photography in a whole new light."

Criticism #2: "It would seem your monitor really isn't any good." and "Listen "bro", you obviously have a problem with noise that you didn't notice but I did so I was trying to help about it."

Read them both and tell me that you don't see the difference. Work on your delivery there, fella. The world needs a little more "nice" in it.

I must apologise to you, the argument was winding me up and it was unfair to take it out on you as well.

As for my criticism, the post you refer to was made after OP started getting shirty with me, my first and second posts were actually as polite and well intentioned as I could probably manage. Perhaps a bit blunt but I felt some advice would be more appreciated than just some good comments as he had plenty already.

How about we all just end this now? I've given my criticism, however you want to take it is up to you and you've voiced your opinion too.