Truth about lenses any lens

[Derrel]

but some here making comments just come to make negative comments, i guess it because they think they are the only one who posts something good LMAO

Something good?

At the ten second mark, Angry Dude claims he's going to teach us something that "not a single other website or forum" will educates you on.

Well let's take the 24-120mm f/4 mention in the video then.

I'd argue Ken Rockwell is one of the most popular websites for lens information. On his page for the 24-120, he measures the distortion/vignetting at various focal range, and publishes the MTF charts at 24mm and 120mm.

If that's not enough for you, DXO Mark is another popular website for lens/sensor measurements. They too have measured the optical performance of the 24-120mm. Here in there interactive chart, you can select various focal length and apertures of the lens and view the results of sharpness, transmission, distortion, vignetting, and CA.

Still not enough? Photographylife.com also reviewed the lens, here I can see easy-to-read sharpness charts at various focal lengths and apertures by center/mid/corner. They also too measure the vignetting and distortion as well at the various focal lengths too.

In this review they even note:

And 120mm is definitely the weakest point of the 24-120mm f/4G VR. We see a pretty visible overall drop of sharpness across the frame, with wide open performance looking the worst. Sadly, even stopping down to f/8 does not do much to improve its extreme corners.

Wow. I thought not a single other website or forum would educate me on this???

Angry Dude isn't being very truthful here...

He then rambles for 13 minutes, ultimately concluding that physical challenges/compromises in optic designs is a marketing technique, at the same time calls pixel peepers who complain about optics at the extreme focal ranges of zoom lenses unintelligent.

Then you come here and give a summary of the video, and write about focusing your lens and there's a sweet spot for the focus. So for any of us who didn't watch the video were completely mislead by your inability to comprehend the video and rehash it here.

So posting a video with little-to-no education or factual content [as well as production value], on a subject that's already well covered, and then mischaracterizing it here is "something good?"

Touche. Or as the kids say today, "burn".

 

[Eric Uberseder]

These people lose me right away when they start talking about other stuff, like this guy with his hot rad car(does anyone call it that any more anyhow). They have to stay on the subject for me to be willing to follow along.

 

[Braineack]

They have to stay on the subject for me to be willing to follow along.

You should read his book on Magnets and learn why everyone else is wrong about them.

 

[zombiesniper]

Ken Whee......er I mean Thea Angry Photographer is the photography worlds version of a conspiracy theorist. Only he can manage to figure out "X". What a pile.

Do zoom lenses have a "Sweet Spot/range"? Sure they do. Why? Nobody wants to pay $200K for an 18-500mm f2.8 lens. Heck even if they did the next complaint would be that it weighs 175lbs.

If you pay $100 for a lens, don't expect 10k worth of performance. That's just ridiculous. Even the expensive lenses aren't perfectly sharp without imperfections.
Expectations have to be based on the reality of the workmanship and cost of a given lens.



In short. Trolls are being trolls. Nothing left to see here.

 

[tirediron]

...In short. Trolls are being trolls. Nothing left to see here.

I dunno dude... we've got almost four pages of "nothing" here so far!

 

[Sharpshooterr]

Only he can manage to figure out "X".

Are you sure he’s figuring out X?
I think he’s just taking the Y, scratching it out and writing in an X!!! LoL
But we need to cut it out, it’s pretty obvious he has a loyal following here. Don’t wanna make’m feel bad and drive them into the closet. After all, being a conspiracy theorists is in right now, we’ve even got on in the ....., nevermind!!!

 

[Tim Tucker 2]

Well this is the absolute truth and you'll only hear it here, this is the only place you'll complete your essential education about bread. It's like driving a hot-rod, it's great for shortbread but not for longer loaves... It's like camera lenses they add extra bits on them for marketing, the crusts are only there to make your sandwich look bigger... And the measure-bakers can't see the loaf for the slices... They look at the corners and say look "no ham!", or "no cheese!"... They don't know that the crust is just marketing, kneeding the dough, pushing the crumb... The best bit of your sandwich is the middle...

I was told this by some alien who abducted me. It wasn't his first abduction as he'd previously abducted a week old British Rail Ham Sandwich that he mistook for intelligent life on an earlier visit, (to be fair it was actually showing more life than the British Rail Guard and so was an understandable mistake...). Anyway they did all sorts of advanced experiments on the sandwich and determined it was all a marketing ploy. I suggested that they could just make the bread any size they wanted anyway, but he said that it just showed how backwards our species was if we didn't yet understand the finer points of marketing strategy and how it was manipulating our perceptions...

Personally I thought he/she/cephlapod was out to lunch and enquired if they could find their own way home or if I should call a cab...

 

[Derrel]

It is amazing how Angry Dude is the only photographer on the whole internet who gives us such valuable insight. He covers things that no one else in the world is aware of. He is indeed a National Treasure. Insight and incredible intelligence drips from his many tattoos. He owns a couple of Alien Bee lights , so he must also be a lighting genius. He pronounces the word Nikkor in the British way,so you know he's really smart.

 

[TWX]

Well this is the absolute truth and you'll only hear it here, this is the only place you'll complete your essential education about bread. It's like driving a hot-rod, it's great for shortbread but not for longer loaves... It's like camera lenses they add extra bits on them for marketing, the crusts are only there to make your sandwich look bigger... And the measure-bakers can't see the loaf for the slices... They look at the corners and say look "no ham!", or "no cheese!"... They don't know that the crust is just marketing, kneeding the dough, pushing the crumb... The best bit of your sandwich is the middle...

I was told this by some alien who abducted me. It wasn't his first abduction as he'd previously abducted a week old British Rail Ham Sandwich that he mistook for intelligent life on an earlier visit, (to be fair it was actually showing more life than the British Rail Guard and so was an understandable mistake...). Anyway they did all sorts of advanced experiments on the sandwich and determined it was all a marketing ploy. I suggested that they could just make the bread any size they wanted anyway, but he said that it just showed how backwards our species was if we didn't yet understand the finer points of marketing strategy and how it was manipulating our perceptions...

Personally I thought he/she/cephlapod was out to lunch and enquired if they could find their own way home or if I should call a cab...

I'm sorry, but after the fifth nested metaphor I got confused.

 

[Soocom1]

uh boy.

Just one observation to make here.


They are called books. They are made out of wood pulp typically and have lots of ink (black wet stuff that drys quickly) that leaves behind little impressions of something called letters.
those are put together to form things called words. And, amazingly, some also contain hororr: aghast) drawings, diagrams and even PHOTOGRAPHS!

Imagine that.

See:
https://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Opt...truction+design&qid=1577200689&s=books&sr=1-1

Now granted the cost is a bit high, but I am sure a used book, (yes they sell those in something called a BOOK STORE) you might find some that are say $5 or $10 or the equivalent in your local currency, and it will hopefully educate you on the ins and outs of (again, dare I say it..) REAL INFORMATION ABOUT A SUBJECT!

Sorry. didn't mean to yell a lot.

Then, once you have enlightened yourself, compare THAT information against Mr. Angry Photographer, and then tell me about this little secret he holds.

Sorry. I dont mean to offend anyone who doesnt know what a book is.
my bad.

 

[Braineack]

Speaking of books. There are also these books:

https://www.amazon.com/Uncovering-M...wheeler&qid=1577201428&s=audible&sr=8-1-fkmr1

Uncovering the Missing Secrets of Magnetism: Exploring the nature of Magnetism, with regards to the true model of atomic geometry and field mechanics by means of rational physics & logic
by Ken Wheeler

Here are some of his reviews:

I wish I could give this a rating of zero. I looked through the book and could not believe this garbage. The author is completely full of them self, and so far off their rocker with the workings of the real world that my head started to spin. I believe that predictable results that are repeatable speak to the correctness of a theory. Not every theory is complete or perfect as it is a model to describe the observable aspects of the physical, and that is only what we are capable of producing. The content of this book doesn't even begin to head in the direction of giving you something you can use to predict the behavior of a system. It is laughable this passes as a "book" of higher learning, at best. This is just downright sad. What is happening to our education system?

Don't be fooled by his many words, strung together to make you think he's smart. There is nothing here. There is no science, there is not rigour, there is no testing, no peer review. Nothing. Notta. Anyone who has a college degree and a small understanding of electromagnetic can see through every word of this cauldron of word words. It's not even a slightly coherent theory or book.

Contains lots of wrong information. That's waste of time. Author does not have any background in physics

I read 10% of the book but I couldn't go on. If you like continuous sarcasm like a U.S. President I'm aware of, perhaps you'd like this book. I thought it was nonsense. Do a search on the word "Ether" in the book and note the author mentions it 400 times. Frankly, that's 399 too many. The grammar is poor and the principles are archaic. The author will consider me a fool also because I've never observed an electron but I believe in the physics that powers my TV and not Ether.

Working/teaching in this field for over 30 years. I am published, I have worked for three government entities, two universities and can't believe what I am reading here.

If I could give this book a ZERO rating, I would. Its complete nonsense, and very little information is factual. Most of its content is false theory's and explanations are not factual but are just opinions. The only secrete is where did you find all this false information?

Very bad. 0 accuracy. Worse than 9/11.

It seems ANYONE can write a book -- even about things they don't understand.

Angry athimself Guy claims that Einstein was an idiot, and everyone that ever disagrees with his own science is an idiot. He's a fouled-mouth loon that uses his edgeyness as a crutch to hide his inability. Everything about him is cringe, but not as much cringe as the people who actually waste their time on him and keep gas in the tank of his red hot Z4.

 

[Soocom1]

No argument about books, but lets consider accolades:
Lens Design Fundamentals | ScienceDirect

Read his Bio.
me thinks hes a bit above.

 

[Tim Tucker 2]

Do you think he knows Nancy Lieder?

Is the Nibiru Cataclysm real, is Zeta Talk just some futuristic social media?

Is magnetism really a vortex or are we stuck in the celestial U-bend of the universe?

Did Ken mistake Nancy's channeling for an orgasm?

Do wind turbines really cause so much cancer that birds litter the ground around them?

Who knows?

Quite frankly all I'm interested in a the mo' is how I'm going to cook Christmas dinner tomorrow and make sure we all have a good time...

See ya' all soon...

 

[wfooshee]

Chemtrails, anyone?

 

[Derrel]

I like how he says several times in this video, "there is a reason prime lenses exist" . But of course he never does State what that reason is.