Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Samyang 14mm f2.8 lens - Diliff.jpg
File:Samyang 14mm f2.8 lens - Diliff.jpg[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Jun 2014 at 16:10:44 (UTC)
- Reason
- I figured I would break up the monotony of my church/cathedral interiors and nominate something a little different. A 'product shot' of my Samyang 14mm lens. I think it compares favourably to other similar images. It's focus stacked from 15 images so the entirety of the lens is in clear focus (except for the rear of the hood). There is a small amount of dust on the lens which reflects the fact that it's not brand new, but it's very minor.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC Aspherical
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Photographic techniques, terms, and equipment
- Creator
- User:Diliff
- Support as nominator – Ðiliff «» (Talk) 16:10, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
- Comment- There looks to be a little condensation (?) or something on the lens as well. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:24, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- Could you be specific? If you're talking about the bumpiness on the lens, that's not condensation, it's a finish applied to the lens body for texture/grip. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 08:58, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- That explains it. Not as prominent in the area which doesn't have any shadows, but looking again definitely there. How would you feel about Photoshopping out some of that dust? Not to the point of misrepresenting the object, but just to clean up the presentation. I'd support either way, but I think a bit of editing is justifiable here. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:50, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- Fair point. I had already cloned some of the dust but didn't have the patience to get rid of it all, but on your suggestion I've gone back and had another go. It's very difficult to remove every single speck but I've got rid of the most objectionable bits. Uploaded over the top. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 14:15, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- That explains it. Not as prominent in the area which doesn't have any shadows, but looking again definitely there. How would you feel about Photoshopping out some of that dust? Not to the point of misrepresenting the object, but just to clean up the presentation. I'd support either way, but I think a bit of editing is justifiable here. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:50, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- Could you be specific? If you're talking about the bumpiness on the lens, that's not condensation, it's a finish applied to the lens body for texture/grip. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 08:58, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- Support Looks great now. I'm glad we'll have another image for the Photographic techniques, terms, and equipment category; we don't get nearly enough. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:12, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- Support - impressive technique and quality. One of my favorite lenses as well. – Juliancolton | Talk 20:40, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- Support Nice one. Unrelated but how is the lens' performance for you? --Muhammad(talk) 06:31, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
- Support Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:56, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
- Comment: The reflections on the lens surface made it rather difficult for me to make out its actual shape. --125.25.60.91 (talk) 13:34, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:Samyang 14mm f2.8 lens - Diliff.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 16:11, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
